[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202101111033.2D03EA97@keescook>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:33:38 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jannh@...gle.com, jeffv@...gle.com,
minchan@...nel.org, mhocko@...e.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, edgararriaga@...gle.com, timmurray@...gle.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm/madvise: replace ptrace attach requirement for
process_madvise
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 09:06:22AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> process_madvise currently requires ptrace attach capability.
> PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH gives one process complete control over another
> process. It effectively removes the security boundary between the
> two processes (in one direction). Granting ptrace attach capability
> even to a system process is considered dangerous since it creates an
> attack surface. This severely limits the usage of this API.
> The operations process_madvise can perform do not affect the correctness
> of the operation of the target process; they only affect where the data
> is physically located (and therefore, how fast it can be accessed).
> What we want is the ability for one process to influence another process
> in order to optimize performance across the entire system while leaving
> the security boundary intact.
> Replace PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH with a combination of PTRACE_MODE_READ
> and CAP_SYS_NICE. PTRACE_MODE_READ to prevent leaking ASLR metadata
> and CAP_SYS_NICE for influencing process performance.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists