linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/vsyscall: Remove CONFIG_LEGACY_VSYSCALL

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: <87k0ardigv.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 May 2022 20:36:48 +0200
From:   Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/vsyscall: Remove CONFIG_LEGACY_VSYSCALL_EMULATE

* Kees Cook:

> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 10:38:53AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> CONFIG_LEGACY_VSYSCALL_EMULATE is, as far as I know, only needed for the
>> combined use of exotic and outdated debugging mechanisms with outdated
>> binaries.  At this point, no one should be using it.  We would like to
>> implement dynamic switching of vsyscalls, but this is much more
>> complicated to support in EMULATE mode than XONLY mode.
>> 
>> So let's force all the distros off of EMULATE mode.  If anyone actually
>> needs it, they can set vsyscall=emulate, and we can then get away with
>> refusing to support newer security models if that option is set.
>> 
>> Cc: x86@...nel.org
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>> Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
>
> Sounds legit! Can we switch the default to "none" while we're at it?

I think that's a userspace ABI break?

I do not have a *very* strong opinion about this.  For one thing, it
would be handy example to have that such deliberate  do actually
happen. 8-)

Thanks,
Florian