linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] fs, net: Standardize on file_receive helper to move fds across processes

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: <20200612184221.rszwhnhvhnigyazq@wittgenstein>
Date:   Fri, 12 Jun 2020 20:42:21 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>,
        Robert Sesek <rsesek@...gle.com>,
        Chris Palmer <palmer@...gle.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        Matt Denton <mpdenton@...gle.com>,
        "cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] fs, net: Standardize on file_receive helper to
 move fds across processes

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:38:33AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:28:16PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > Al didn't want the PAGE_SIZE limit in there because there's nothing
> > inherently wrong with copying insane amounts of memory.
> 
> Right, ok.
> 
> > (Another tangent. I've asked this on Twitter not too long ago: do we
> > have stats how long copy_from_user()/copy_struct_from_user() takes with
> > growing struct/memory size? I'd be really interested in this. I have a
> > feeling that clone3()'s and - having had a chat with David Howells -
> > openat2()'s structs will continue to grow for a while... and I'd really
> > like to have some numbers on when copy_struct_from_user() becomes
> > costly or how costly it becomes.)
> 
> How long it takes? It should be basically the same, the costs should be
> mostly in switching memory protections, etc. I wouldn't imagine how many
> bytes being copied would matter much here, given the sub-page sizes.

This makes me _very_ happy.

Christian