From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752337AbdDILKS (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Apr 2017 07:10:18 -0400 Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com ([209.85.220.178]:35316 "EHLO mail-qk0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751922AbdDILKL (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Apr 2017 07:10:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <31421.1491569449@warthog.procyon.org.uk> References: <149142326734.5101.4596394505987813763.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <149142340198.5101.8171352010918423590.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <31421.1491569449@warthog.procyon.org.uk> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2017 14:10:10 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/24] asus-wmi: Restrict debugfs interface when the kernel is locked down To: David Howells Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , matthew.garrett@nebula.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, One Thousand Gnomes , Greg Kroah-Hartman , acpi4asus-user , Platform Driver , linux-security-module , keyrings@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:50 PM, David Howells wrote: > Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> > From: Matthew Garrett >> > >> > We have no way of validating what all of the Asus WMI methods do on a given >> > machine - and there's a risk that some will allow hardware state to be >> > manipulated in such a way that arbitrary code can be executed in the >> > kernel, circumventing module loading restrictions. Prevent that if the >> > kernel is locked down. >> >> > + if (kernel_is_locked_down()) >> > + return -EPERM; >> >> It looks a bit fragile when responsility of whatever reasons kernel >> can't serve become a driver burden. >> Can we fix this in debugfs framework instead? > > Fix it with debugfs how? We can't offload the decision to userspace. I mean to do at least similar like you have done for module parameters. So, instead of putting above code to each attribute in question make a special (marked) attribute instead and debugfs framework will know how to deal with that. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko