From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1031534Ab2CVXqh (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 22 Mar 2012 19:46:37 -0400
Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:42850 "EHLO
	Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1758440Ab2CVXqf (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 22 Mar 2012 19:46:35 -0400
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 00:46:27 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, spender@grsecurity.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] futex: do not leak robust list to unprivileged process
In-Reply-To: <20120320172300.GA8888@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1203230043470.2542@ionos>
References: <20120319231253.GA20893@www.outflux.net> <20120320133141.GC2918@peqn> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1203201758220.2542@ionos> <CAGXu5jKVx41+NSEWsw0YF74z5_heSQ6GOmkuDi1DXNPcO4sjTQ@mail.gmail.com> <20120320172300.GA8888@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0
X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: -
X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required,  ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > > I really wonder why we have this syscall at all.
> > 
> > The documentation I found yesterday while looking at this was: 
> > http://linux.die.net/man/2/get_robust_list
> > 
> > Which says "The system call is only available for debugging 
> > purposes and is not needed for normal operations. Both system 
> > calls are not available to application programs as functions; 
> > they can be called using the syscall(3) function."
> > 
> > Dropping the syscall entirely would certainly make it secure. 
> > ;)
> 
> The thinking was API completeness. In general it's possible for 
> a sufficiently privileged task to figure out all the state of a 
> task. We can query timers, fds - the robust list is such a 
> resource as well. The information leakage was obviously not 
> intended.

So I think it's safe to take Kees' patch as is. On top of that we
should add a WARN_ONCE when the syscall is invoked and schedule the
sucker for removal.

Thoughts ?

	 tglx