linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI: Drop the custom

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: <CAJZ5v0jkp2SP5DDg5eYkZu9_buQ7i2isGfgJYvD2ZHFKtTr_DA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 17:53:10 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, 
	Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, "shiqiang.deng" <shiqiang.deng213@...il.com>, 
	Sebastian Grzywna <swiftgeek@...il.com>, Hang Zhang <zh.nvgt@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI: Drop the custom_method debugfs interface

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 5:50 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 05:38:55PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> >
> > The ACPI custom_method debugfs interface is security-sensitive and
> > concurrent access to it is broken [1].
> >
> > Moreover, the recipe for preparing a customized version of a given
> > control method has changed at one point due to ACPICA changes, which
> > has not been reflected in its documentation, so whoever used it before
> > has had to adapt and it had gone unnoticed for a long time.
> >
> > This interface was a bad idea to start with and its implementation is
> > fragile at the design level.  It's been always conceptually questionable,
> > problematic from the security standpoint and implemented poorly.
> >
> > Patches fixing its most apparent functional issues (for example, [2]) don't
> > actually address much of the above.
> >
> > Granted, at the time it was introduced, there was no alternative, but
> > there is the AML debugger in the kernel now and there is the configfs
> > interface allowing custom ACPI tables to be loaded.  The former can be
> > used for extensive AML debugging and the latter can be use for testing
> > new AML. [3]
> >
> > Accordingly, drop custom_method along with its (outdated anyway)
> > documentation.
> >
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20221227063335.61474-1-zh.nvgt@gmail.com/ # [1]
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20231111132402.4142-1-shiqiang.deng213@gmail.com/ [2]
> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62849113/how-to-unload-an-overlay-loaded-using-acpi-config-sysfs # [3]
>
> I believe you missed Link: tags for 2 and 3.

Obviously, you are right.

That's easy to fix, though, and I'd rather not confuse people by
sending a v4 just because of this.

> > Reported-by: Hang Zhang <zh.nvgt@...il.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>