netdev - Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4 03/13] task_isolation: userspace hard isolation from kernel

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: <87mu0kipqv.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sat, 17 Oct 2020 22:03:52 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Alex Belits <abelits@...vell.com>,
        "nitesh\@redhat.com" <nitesh@...hat.com>,
        "frederic\@kernel.org" <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc:     "mingo\@kernel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "davem\@davemloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "linux-api\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        "rostedt\@goodmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "peterz\@infradead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "linux-arch\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        "catalin.marinas\@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        "will\@kernel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Prasun Kapoor <pkapoor@...vell.com>,
        "netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel\@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4 03/13] task_isolation: userspace hard isolation from kernel

On Sat, Oct 17 2020 at 16:15, Alex Belits wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 18:08 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 17 2020 at 01:08, Alex Belits wrote:
>> > I think that the goal of "finding source of disturbance" interface
>> > is
>> > different from what can be accomplished by tracing in two ways:
>> > 
>> > 1. "Source of disturbance" should provide some useful information
>> > about
>> > category of event and it cause as opposed to determining all
>> > precise
>> > details about things being called that resulted or could result in
>> > disturbance. It should not depend on the user's knowledge about
>> > details
>> 
>> Tracepoints already give you selectively useful information.
>
> Carefully placed tracepoints also can give the user information about
> failures of open(), write(), execve() or mmap(). However syscalls still
> provide an error code instead of returning generic failure and letting
> user debug the cause.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to tell me.

Thanks,

        tglx