linux-kernel - [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] module: Introduce module unload taint tracking

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20220419150334.3395019-1-atomlin@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:03:32 +0100
From:   Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>
To:     mcgrof@...nel.org
Cc:     cl@...ux.com, pmladek@...e.com, mbenes@...e.cz,
        christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
        atomlin@...mlin.com, ghalat@...hat.com
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] module: Introduce module unload taint tracking

Hi Luis,

This is based on the latest mcgrof/modules-next branch.  I have decided
still to use RCU even though no entry is ever removed from the unloaded
tainted modules list. That being said, if I understand correctly, it is not
safe in some instances to use 'module_mutex' in print_modules(). So instead
we disable preemption to ensure list traversal with concurrent list
manipulation e.g. list_add_rcu(), is safe too.

Please let me know your thoughts.

Aaron Tomlin (2):
  module: Make module_flags_taint() accept a module's taints bitmap
    directly
  module: Introduce module unload taint tracking

 init/Kconfig         | 11 +++++++
 kernel/module/main.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

base-commit: eeaec7801c421e17edda6e45a32d4a5596b633da
-- 
2.34.1