Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v2 02/11] mm: Hardened usercopy
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: kernel-hardening@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bsingharora@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v2 02/11] mm: Hardened usercopy
- From: Daniel Micay <danielmicay@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 15:00:54 -0400
- Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, PaX Team <pageexec@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Brad Spengler <spender@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "x86@xxxxxxxxxx" <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx>, David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx>, Mathias Krause <minipli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@xxxxxxxxx>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx>, Laura Abbott <labbott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, sparclinux <sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-arch <linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <CAGXu5jKzD_rCMNJQU1bB5KDfKTsb+AaidZwe=FAfGMqt_FkfqQ@mail.gmail.com>
- List-id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
- References: <1468446964-22213-1-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org> <1468446964-22213-3-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org> <20160714232019.GA28254@350D> <CAGXu5jKzD_rCMNJQU1bB5KDfKTsb+AaidZwe=FAfGMqt_FkfqQ@mail.gmail.com>
> This could be a BUG, but I'd rather not panic the entire kernel.
It seems unlikely that it will panic without panic_on_oops and that's
an explicit opt-in to taking down the system on kernel logic errors
exactly like this. In grsecurity, it calls the kernel exploit handling
logic (panic if root, otherwise kill all process of that user and ban
them until reboot) but that same logic is also called for BUG via oops
handling so there's only really a distinction with panic_on_oops=1.
Does it make sense to be less fatal for a fatal assertion that's more
likely to be security-related? Maybe you're worried about having some
false positives for the whitelisting portion, but I don't think those
will lurk around very long with the way this works.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]