netdev - Re: [Security] [SECURITY] Fix leaking of kernel heap addresses via /proc

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]

Date:	Mon, 8 Nov 2010 02:00:42 +0100
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, chas@....nrl.navy.mil,
	security@...nel.org, pekkas@...core.fi, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, drosenberg@...curity.com,
	jmorris@...ei.org, remi.denis-courmont@...ia.com,
	kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: [Security] [SECURITY] Fix leaking of kernel heap addresses via /proc

On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 04:57:03PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 13:50:32 -0700
> 
> > On Saturday, November 6, 2010, Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Clearly, in most cases we cannot just remove the field from the /proc
> >> output, as this would break a number of userspace programs that rely on
> >> consistency.  However, I propose that we replace the address with a "0"
> >> rather than leaking this information.
> > 
> > I really think it would be much better to use the unidentified number
> > or similar.
> > 
> > Just replacing with zeroes is annoying, and has the potential of
> > losing actual information.
> 
> I would really like to see the specific examples of where this is
> happening, it sounds like something very silly to me.

It has happened to me several times to use an hex editor to check some
socket's parameters (eg: backlog) based on the pointer. Sometimes I had
even change some parameters at runtime as part of debugging sessions.

In fact we could consider than many places that return pointers could
return 0 to normal users and the real value only to root (or any special
capability). I find it important not to reduce the observability of the
kernel for the sake of security.

Regards,
Willy

--
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