From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7035C433ED for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 16:09:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shelob.surriel.com (shelob.surriel.com [96.67.55.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27C91601FC for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 16:09:08 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 27C91601FC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmx.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernelnewbies-bounces@kernelnewbies.org Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=shelob.surriel.com) by shelob.surriel.com with esmtp (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lUtgf-0007z2-B4; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 12:08:49 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]) by shelob.surriel.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lUtgb-0007pU-0W for kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 12:08:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1617984506; bh=HEzSNgADWM4JdH/UP4RWxfXteS7uGjPvcCoUhETis/w=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=TMp7qmyOTZ06xZtd3IkwSP3IInsseEcEgh3JgzcGx4qzd7o1uncrGzYdEvgq3C4gr ZeNAoaODnWiuEHh0wNKdPbc50soCpSvVH5eWBOnn4/+2KbADchHCCp9XPQXKz03Qjo IxL72Qyu0QN3YHxTfKAb+TGUGDug2AIXg2tmFXN0= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from ubuntu ([83.52.229.153]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MMGRA-1lEshT48ww-00JFln; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 18:08:26 +0200 Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:08:14 +0200 From: John Wood To: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Notify special task kill using wait* functions Message-ID: <20210409160814.GA4937@ubuntu> References: <145687.1617485641@turing-police> <20210404094837.GA3263@ubuntu> <193167.1617570625@turing-police> <20210405073147.GA3053@ubuntu> <115437.1617753336@turing-police> <20210407175151.GA3301@ubuntu> <184666.1617827926@turing-police> <20210408015148.GB3762101@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <20210409142933.GA3150@ubuntu> <20210409150621.GJ3762101@tassilo.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210409150621.GJ3762101@tassilo.jf.intel.com> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:IsLAyPnMEKrzZmnegL9MyBRHawdUyxil//3hcCrquCaKFVNVr0o g0p6Jc7cmZTcu5XqE+R8rFrnselUZm4OY3Ky5j/XxQcaJHWZUDPhYP6OIyAS4HH31LN/Uxx +TP1OGTLcIBB/VSUjq5h0tC7MSC7eR5Z+gvUicuIghTDCn3aZcYsXHHY7nV6GeUYPkVwu5W gNDsv+QhpRI0FOeZP8Bsw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:w/ghK7fOuso=:HM2XrcA+UBAA6skFfEdrJf qH8ZitfDacjhM9eBr22yNOkWWyXGT2XHxoGBXw1KP3RZRQSRx5rKLOU7ZPcRa84pu72onwApT XRD4NIs1V848Ixkdg2z7QJvh7x5ECDCLy1m8zmmVX5QufVaYPH1SUCw5RlS2FxxtrMvHqXCsj sCeqSn7VUMlA0PQ8JG1Z01g07euXSoqB25fs10z5AZuUZGjO8IB+QTqH//E4zdAlzCxTgx2lR 5j6fPTgLEhFHBwYc6OWCS4/NZbyJxLa7Zl9jjp0Pon5q1YjM4q1DeDE0/mX3gEb0GBl6zKFdq wtM51eCe5hBC9o6MlVwAixQh6+nkaPcSu+O2h5aoM1O/dG7fNj3Vlj8T/Mp9fKYvUbP3cCXAD VqykZ5YcxveVf6eKg2xW3aGbmPV5uqgiP0agBBEFMloW7rXyEM7+VzOVrb1WwOXIalaMGVESn RmACrhQ4Nem6+2Rq2GZSaG+FmAyo4bGvBzeq36RXaG50EhulLFCbHfzM5qQmD+d1PKYUYetEI +BBgyBKvUjt9fuawDPMEDpIDgVKt75cwrGuiWMn9fGDtZIi4vi3cgiMMbb3QI0254ClRgM5X9 SBjYQqE5J0RMhD3d4MZO7GY88Z+v8te6B6ffP1nTuCcOn/rXTJyTflJxWvHUmMWxxU8X7FxUV cNSE41BSpu/Ao2RIYgwdALDXpeoQwPNdOlTi8VZyZ2C1MUQXMzcgyWt8sQxUkH4P79EOo8fGL abSSzgAD1Ym7jfIKujzgleneBeah4Y3CTFku4JEAVKNHQPofnjOV0vci/z1wi/rA/8qr+Gcap 1n3T7dkVLTTk8smDNVU0Byh/3rEnf8s7xQwburuqZAPH6Id11RQHf3yHuYb5U6xTwERyRtJ6N TR3M89mOKh6gpYly1lAzrrB+x6D1ycM2W71sjz4FxK13cu3CxhttaS/kM3zawzGKHhwH6IOS1 C8lEVSg3BYaITasxxMD3Zfp1YiQtFlXJZ5oP/zl7LRk9GEj4Ey24pVOBtQZbvX3yRyFT1gTgJ RWKWCVeefVGamp4CpwUdRz7Aq6m5XaOy+FBWoE1CVlhfEbmlBzyzDTOjLodpTvGFVlhUu1Tyy IUN9EiJVhTWCgISl8LRR2HAjd70Hi9AJXmC3N5lI6atzbobMQMepoRYN7F1zfzTDPaKb5FHpd bl23eqQOUsmWPUWLFIMgNe0E2T4R7JZYV6JoG9+a+LifEeqb4SWesatDkLNcQRcdGn2uA= Cc: Valdis =?utf-8?Q?Kl=C4=93tnieks?= , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, John Wood , Kees Cook , kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org X-BeenThere: kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Learn about the Linux kernel List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kernelnewbies-bounces@kernelnewbies.org Hi, On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:06:21AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Any caching of state is inherently insecure because any caches of limited > > > size can be always thrashed by a purposeful attacker. I suppose the > > > only thing that would work is to actually write something to the > > > executable itself on disk, but of course that doesn't always work either. > > > > I'm also working on this. In the next version I will try to find a way to > > prevent brute force attacks through the execve system call with more than > > one level of forking. > > Thanks. > > Thinking more about it what I wrote above wasn't quite right. The cache > would only need to be as big as the number of attackable services/suid > binaries. Presumably on many production systems that's rather small, > so a cache (which wouldn't actually be a cache, but a complete database) > might actually work. Thanks. I will keep it in mind. > > -Andi Regards, John Wood _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies