From: andrea@cpushare.com
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
ajwade@cpe001346162bf9-cm0011ae8cd564.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com,
Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
bunk@stusta.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 01:11:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060713231118.GA1913@opteron.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060713212940.GB4101@ucw.cz>
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 09:29:41PM +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Actually random delays are unlike to help (much). You have just added
> noise, but you can still decode original signal...
You're wrong, the random delays added to every packet will definitely
wipe out any signal.
But regardless of what is the best fix for the network attack I quote
Ingo:
correct. But when i suggested to do precisely that i got a rant from
Andrea of how super duper important it was to disable the TSC for
seccomp ... (which argument is almost total hogwash)
Now if the availability of the nanosecond precision of the TSC is
almost total hogwash, how can the network attack be a real concern?
Either the NOTSC feature is critically important (and I don't think it
is but it's not total hogwash either), or the network attach is an
absolute red-herring.
You can't get it both ways. It can't be the NOTSC isn't needed but the
network attack is a serious concern.
What is currently shocking me is that if you really think the network
attack isn't an absolute red-herring, then it's very weird you're
answering to my email instead of answering to Ingo when he says the
availability of the TSC is almost total hogwash.
And please feel free to demonstrate the network attack, remote seccomp
computations are already possible so if you want to start listening to
a signal you can.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-13 23:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-29 19:21 [2.6 patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n Adrian Bunk
2006-06-30 0:44 ` Lee Revell
2006-06-30 1:07 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-30 1:40 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-06-30 4:52 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2006-06-30 9:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-30 14:58 ` andrea
2006-07-11 7:36 ` [patch] " Ingo Molnar
2006-07-11 14:17 ` andrea
2006-07-11 14:32 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-11 15:31 ` andrea
2006-07-11 15:54 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-11 16:13 ` andrea
2006-07-11 16:23 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-11 16:57 ` Alan Cox
2006-07-11 16:25 ` Alan Cox
2006-07-11 16:02 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-07-11 16:16 ` andrea
2006-07-11 16:24 ` Alan Cox
2006-07-12 15:43 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-12 21:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-07-12 22:06 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-12 22:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-07-12 22:33 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-12 22:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-07-13 3:16 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2006-07-13 11:23 ` Jeff Dike
2006-07-13 11:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-07-13 3:04 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2006-07-13 3:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-13 4:40 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2006-07-13 4:51 ` andrea
2006-07-13 5:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-13 6:22 ` andrea
2006-07-13 1:51 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-13 2:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-13 7:44 ` James Bruce
2006-07-13 8:34 ` andrea
2006-07-13 9:18 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-14 6:09 ` [PATCH] TIF_NOTSC and SECCOMP prctl andrea
2006-07-14 6:27 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-14 6:33 ` andrea
2006-07-13 12:13 ` [patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n Andi Kleen
2006-07-12 21:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-07-12 22:11 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-11 15:54 ` Pavel Machek
2006-06-30 12:39 ` [2.6 patch] " Alan Cox
2006-06-30 2:35 ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-06-30 15:03 ` Lee Revell
2006-07-08 9:23 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2006-07-11 1:59 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-07-11 4:16 ` andrea
2006-07-11 20:19 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-07-12 21:05 ` andrea
2006-07-12 22:02 ` Alan Cox
2006-07-12 23:44 ` andrea
2006-07-13 21:29 ` Pavel Machek
2006-07-13 23:11 ` andrea [this message]
2006-07-13 23:20 ` Pavel Machek
2006-07-14 0:34 ` andrea
2006-07-15 2:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-07-16 0:51 ` andrea
2006-07-16 1:54 ` Pavel Machek
2006-07-16 15:36 ` andrea
2006-07-13 2:56 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-07-12 21:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-07-13 1:16 ` andrea
2006-07-13 1:37 ` Andrew James Wade
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-06-26 16:26 Adrian Bunk
2006-04-27 20:33 Adrian Bunk
2006-04-18 22:07 Adrian Bunk
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=20060713231118.GA1913@opteron.random \
--to=andrea@cpushare.com \
--cc=ajwade@cpe001346162bf9-cm0011ae8cd564.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox