linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] signal: Extend exec

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: <CAHk-=wgM3qZeChs_1yFt8p8ye1pOaM_cX57BZ_0+qdEPcAiaCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Apr 2020 16:55:42 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
        Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>,
        Adam Zabrocki <pi3@....com.pl>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@...mail.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal: Extend exec_id to 64bits

On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 4:51 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> It's literally testing a sequence counter for equality. If you get
> tearing in the high bits on the write (or the read), you'd still need
> to have the low bits turn around 4G times to get a matching value.

Put another way: first you'd have to work however many weeks to do 4
billion execve() calls, and then you need to hit basically a
single-instruction race to take advantage of it.

Good luck with that. If you have that kind of God-like capability,
whoever you're attacking stands no chance in the first place.

                  Linus