From: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
To: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Cc: Brad Spengler <spender@grsecurity.net>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] procfs: infoleaks and DAC permissions
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:56:53 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120221145653.GA22597@openwall.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120210143616.GA6100@albatros>
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 06:36:17PM +0400, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> [1] http://grsecurity.net/~spender/dev_patches/distros_should_sponsor_me_for_doing_their_jobs.patch
In order to provide its security, this relies on atomic64_t actually
being 64-bit and on atomic64_inc_return() returning a 64-bit value - but
one or both of these requirements appear to be violated for some archs.
In fact, per a quick grep it appears that atomic64_inc_return() exists
for a subset of the archs only.
The patch still looks OK to apply for distros that only care about a
handful of archs, where this is fully 64-bit. Correct?
Are there any other known issues with this patch (or approach)?
A newer revision of it maybe (e.g. what's merged in grsecurity patch)?
I am just guessing.
Should there be a different revision of the patch for mainline? Perhaps
it'd have to use a spinlock at least on archs lacking 64-bit atomics.
Alexander
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-21 14:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-10 2:06 [kernel-hardening] procfs: infoleaks and DAC permissions Djalal Harouni
2012-02-10 14:36 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2012-02-11 9:20 ` Solar Designer
2012-02-11 10:21 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2012-02-11 13:31 ` Solar Designer
2012-02-12 0:19 ` Djalal Harouni
2012-02-21 14:56 ` Solar Designer [this message]
2012-02-21 16:25 ` Djalal Harouni
2012-02-21 17:42 ` Solar Designer
2012-02-24 0:56 ` Solar Designer
2012-02-25 3:56 ` Solar Designer
2012-03-03 0:35 ` Djalal Harouni
2012-02-21 16:34 ` Djalal Harouni
2012-02-11 10:07 ` Solar Designer
2012-02-12 15:36 ` Djalal Harouni
2012-02-13 15:50 ` Djalal Harouni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120221145653.GA22597@openwall.com \
--to=solar@openwall.com \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=spender@grsecurity.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.