linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] perf: Use CAP_SYS_ADMIN with perf_event

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190807114602.GB9605@krava>
Date:   Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:46:02 +0200
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Igor Lubashev <ilubashe@...mai.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] perf: Use CAP_SYS_ADMIN with perf_event_paranoid
 checks

On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 11:35:55PM -0400, Igor Lubashev wrote:
> The kernel is using CAP_SYS_ADMIN instead of euid==0 to override
> perf_event_paranoid check. Make perf do the same.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Igor Lubashev <ilubashe@...mai.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c    | 3 ++-
>  tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c | 4 ++--
>  tools/perf/arch/x86/util/intel-bts.c | 3 ++-
>  tools/perf/arch/x86/util/intel-pt.c  | 2 +-
>  tools/perf/util/evsel.c              | 2 +-
>  5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c b/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c
> index 5cb07e8cb296..b87a1ca2968f 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>  #include "../../perf.h"
>  #include "../../util/auxtrace.h"
>  #include "../../util/cpumap.h"
> +#include "../../util/event.h"
>  #include "../../util/evlist.h"
>  #include "../../util/evsel.h"
>  #include "../../util/pmu.h"
> @@ -254,7 +255,7 @@ static int cs_etm_recording_options(struct auxtrace_record *itr,
>  	struct perf_pmu *cs_etm_pmu = ptr->cs_etm_pmu;
>  	struct evsel *evsel, *cs_etm_evsel = NULL;
>  	struct perf_cpu_map *cpus = evlist->core.cpus;
> -	bool privileged = (geteuid() == 0 || perf_event_paranoid() < 0);
> +	bool privileged = perf_event_paranoid_check(-1);
>  	int err = 0;
>  
>  	ptr->evlist = evlist;
> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c
> index 00915b8fd05b..200bc973371b 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>  #include <time.h>
>  
>  #include "../../util/cpumap.h"
> +#include "../../util/event.h"
>  #include "../../util/evsel.h"
>  #include "../../util/evlist.h"
>  #include "../../util/session.h"
> @@ -65,8 +66,7 @@ static int arm_spe_recording_options(struct auxtrace_record *itr,
>  	struct arm_spe_recording *sper =
>  			container_of(itr, struct arm_spe_recording, itr);
>  	struct perf_pmu *arm_spe_pmu = sper->arm_spe_pmu;
> -	struct evsel *evsel, *arm_spe_evsel = NULL;

wouldn't this removal break the compilation on arm?

jirka

> -	bool privileged = geteuid() == 0 || perf_event_paranoid() < 0;
> +	bool privileged = perf_event_paranoid_check(-1);
>  	struct evsel *tracking_evsel;
>  	int err;

SNIP