linux-kernel - Re: [RFCv1 0/6] Page Detective

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: <CAJD7tkaYuJpxijOp6se+mWHO6djaz_7KaoXjf=Rdo6nJubwB2w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:33:18 -0800
From: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, corbet@....net, 
	derek.kiernan@....com, dragan.cvetic@....com, arnd@...db.de, 
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz, tj@...nel.org, 
	hannes@...xchg.org, mhocko@...nel.org, shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, 
	muchun.song@...ux.dev, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, 
	vbabka@...e.cz, jannh@...gle.com, shuah@...nel.org, vegard.nossum@...cle.com, 
	vattunuru@...vell.com, schalla@...vell.com, david@...hat.com, 
	willy@...radead.org, osalvador@...e.de, usama.anjum@...labora.com, 
	andrii@...nel.org, ryan.roberts@....com, peterx@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com, 
	tandersen@...flix.com, rientjes@...gle.com, gthelen@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFCv1 0/6] Page Detective

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 8:14 AM Pasha Tatashin
<pasha.tatashin@...een.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 2:36 PM Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 11:30 AM Pasha Tatashin
> > <pasha.tatashin@...een.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 1:23 PM Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 10:08:36AM -0500, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 8:09 PM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 05:08:42PM -0500, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> > > > > > > Additionally, using crash/drgn is not feasible for us at this time, it
> > > > > > > requires keeping external tools on our hosts, also it requires
> > > > > > > approval and a security review for each script before deployment in
> > > > > > > our fleet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So it's ok to add a totally insecure kernel feature to your fleet
> > > > > > instead?  You might want to reconsider that policy decision :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Greg,
> > > > >
> > > > > While some risk is inherent, we believe the potential for abuse here
> > > > > is limited, especially given the existing  CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement.
> > > > > But, even with root access compromised, this tool presents a smaller
> > > > > attack surface than alternatives like crash/drgn. It exposes less
> > > > > sensitive information, unlike crash/drgn, which could potentially
> > > > > allow reading all of kernel memory.
> > > >
> > > > The problem here is with using dmesg for output. No security-sensitive
> > > > information should go there. Even exposing raw kernel pointers is not
> > > > considered safe.
> > >
> > > I am OK in writing the output to a debugfs file in the next version,
> > > the only concern I have is that implies that dump_page() would need to
> > > be basically duplicated, as it now outputs everything via printk's.
> >
> > Perhaps you can refactor the code in dump_page() to use a seq_buf,
> > then have dump_page() printk that seq_buf using seq_buf_do_printk(),
> > and have page detective output that seq_buf to the debugfs file?
>
> Good idea, I will look into modifying it this way.
>
> > We do something very similar with memory_stat_format(). We use the
>
> void mem_cgroup_print_oom_meminfo(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> {
>         /* Use static buffer, for the caller is holding oom_lock. */
>         static char buf[PAGE_SIZE];
>         ....
>         seq_buf_init(&s, buf, sizeof(buf));
>         memory_stat_format(memcg, &s);
>         seq_buf_do_printk(&s, KERN_INFO);
> }
>
> This is a callosal stack allocation, given that our fleet only has 8K
> stacks. :-)

That's a static allocation though :)