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  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]
Date:   Sat, 22 Aug 2020 18:06:03 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Daniel Gutson <daniel@...ypsium.com>,
        Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org>,
        linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alex Bazhaniuk <alex@...ypsium.com>,
        Richard Hughes <hughsient@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: intel-spi: Do not try to make the SPI flash
 chip writable

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:11 AM Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 10:38:24AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 8:57 AM Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > > Actually thinking about this bit more, to make PCI and the platform
> > > parts consistent we can make the "writeable" control this for the PCI
> > > part as well. So what if we add a callback to struct intel_spi_boardinfo
> > > that the PCI driver populates and then the "core" driver uses to enable
> > > writing when "writeable" is set to 1.
> >
> > If you are really worried about the write protection being bypassed by
> > a different driver or code injection, the best way would seem to be to
> > only enable writing in the mtd write callback and disable it immediately
> > after the write is complete. I still don't see why this hardware would
> > be more susceptible to this kind of attack than other drivers though,
> > as it already has the safeguard against writing through the MTD layer
> > without the module parameter.
>
> Hmm, is there already a mechanism at the MTD level to prevent writes? If
> that's the case then sure we can use that instead.

The mtd core just checks both the permissions on the device node (which
default to 0600 without any special udev rules) and the MTD_WRITEABLE
on the underlying device that is controlled by the module parameter
in case of intel-spi{,-platform,-pci}.c.

     Arnd

Powered by blists - more mailing lists