netdev - Re: setrlimit(RLIMIT_NETWORK) vs. prctl(???)

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: <20091215053307.GA6837@heat>
Date:	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:33:08 -0500
From:	Michael Stone <michael@...top.org>
To:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: setrlimit(RLIMIT_NETWORK) vs. prctl(???)

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 21:09, Michael Stone <michael@...top.org> wrote:
>> That being said, I'm not wedded to the decision. Could you give me some
>> more specific examples of the kinds of changes in low-level userspace code
>> that you're worried about?
> 
> As summarized in the paraphrased comment, it's a pain to deal with
> rlimit extensions.  It's easy enough to do all this using prctl() with
> the same semantics and without forcing any other code to be modified.
> I let others more competent to judge the usefulness.  But using rlimit
> as the interface is just plain wrong.

I still like the rlimit-based interface because I think it gives good intuition
about how to use the facility and about how it ought to be exposed to high-level
parts of userland but it certainly can't hurt to cook up a version based on
prctl() so that we can make a fair comparison of the two. 

I'll see what I can come up with.

Regards,

Michael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html