On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 02:59:00PM +, HW42 wrote:
> I think you really should allow pseudonymous contributions. But in my
> case my nickname is anyway linked to my legal name so fell free to use:
> Simon Gaiser
I personally always have difficulties with pseudos in emails, I think
it's just a
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 04:22:10PM +0100, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> > From 103f6112f253017d7062cd74d17f4a514ed4485c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Jan Beulich
> > Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 00:27:04 -0600
> > Subject: x86/mm/xen: Suppress hugetlbfs in PV guests
Queued for next 3.10, thanks Thom
Hi Thomas,
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 01:42:25AM +0100, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the patch set from XSA-157 [1] is missing from
>
> - linux-3.10
(...)
Thank you for both of these, I'm queueing these for the next 3.10.
Willy
___
Xen-devel mai
Denys Vlasenko
Cc: H. Peter Anvin
Cc: Juergen Gross
Cc: Linus Torvalds
Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez
Cc: Peter Zijlstra
Cc: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: Toshi Kani
Cc: xen-devel
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/57188ed80278000e4...@prv-mh.provo.novell.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Willy Ta
homas Gleixner
Cc: secur...@kernel.org
Cc: xen-devel
Link:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/0b0e55b995cda11e7829f140b833ef932fcabe3a.1438291540.git.l...@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings
(cherry picked from commit b48d6a721ba2cb475aea937c707f577aafa660a2)
Sig
This is the second version. It adds a strategy for the sysctls so that we
can reject any change to a value that was already negative. This way it's
possible to disable modify_ldt temporarily or permanently (eg: lock down a
server) as suggested by Kees.
Willy Tarreau (2):
sysctl: add
alternative. A message is logged if an attempt was stopped so that
it's easy to spot if/when it is needed.
Cc: Andy Lutomirski
Cc: Kees Cook
Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau
---
Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt | 16
arch/x86/Kconfig| 17 +
arch/x86/k
The new function is proc_dointvec_minmax_negperm(), it refuses to change
the value if the current one is already negative. This will be used to
lock down some settings such as sensitive system calls.
Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau
---
kernel/sysctl.c | 36
1
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 11:33:30AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > The new function is proc_dointvec_minmax_negperm(), it refuses to change
> > the value if the current one is already negative. This will be used to
>
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 11:45:24AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I'm not entirely convinced that the lock bit should work this way. At
> some point, we might want a setting for "32-bit only" or even "32-bit,
> present, not non-conforming only" (like we do unconditionally for
> set_thread_area).
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 12:06:12PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
(...)
> > I feel like it's probably part of a larger project then. Do you think
> > we should step back and only support 0/1 for now ? I also have the
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 03:35:15PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Yay for perm disable! Thank you! :)
Andy would like to see this evolve towards something possibly
more complete and/or generic. I think this needs more thoughts
and that we should possibly stick to 0/1 for now and decide how
we want to m
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 05:54:51AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 11:45:24AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > P.P.P.S. Who thought that IRET faults unmasking NMIs made any sense
> > whatsoever when NMIs run on an IST stack? Seriously, people?
>
> What happened with aski
stopped so that it's easy to spot if/when it is needed.
Future improvements regarding permanent disabling will have to be done
in consideration for other syscalls, ABIs and general use cases.
Cc: Andy Lutomirski
Cc: Kees Cook
Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau
---
So this is the third version which
Hi Ingo,
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:00:37AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> > @@ -276,6 +282,15 @@ asmlinkage int sys_modify_ldt(int func, void __user
> > *ptr,
> > {
> > int ret = -ENOSYS;
>
rable, it might
be different because some users might want to contact their admin to ask for
a specific one. But here, there's usually no admin so I'm fine with hardening
it.
> (Sadly /etc/sysctl.conf is world-readable on most distros.)
Yes, just like most executables are readable while
Hi Andy,
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:23:47PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> The modify_ldt syscall exposes a large attack surface and is
> unnecessary for modern userspace. Make it optional.
Wouldn't you prefer something like this which makes it possible to re-enable
it at runtime so that we can
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 04:40:14PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > I've been pondering something like this that is even MORE generic, for
> > any syscall. Something like a "syscalls" directory under
> > /proc/sys/kernel, with 1 entry per syscal
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 05:09:21PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > All this to say that probably only a handful of tricky syscalls would
> > need an on/off switch but clearly not all of them at all, so I'd rather
> > add a few entries just for the relevant ones, mainly to fix compatibility
> > issues a
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 09:24:51AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 05:09:21PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > All this to say that probably only a handful of tricky syscalls would
> > > need an on/off switch but clearly not all of them at all, so I
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:36:45PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> The modify_ldt syscall exposes a large attack surface and is
> unnecessary for modern userspace. Make it optional.
Andy, you didn't respond whether you think it wouldn't be better to make
it runtime-configurable instead. The goal
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:36:43PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Willy and Kees: I left the config option alone. The -tiny people will
> like it, and we can always add a sysctl of some sort later.
OK, please ignore my other e-mail I missed this part. I'll see if I
can propose the sysctl complet
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:44:52PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I'm all for it, but I think it should be hard-disablable in config,
> too, for the -tiny people.
I totally agree.
> If we add a runtime disable, let's do a
> separate patch, and you and Kees can fight over how general it should
>
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 09:50:52AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:44:52PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > I'm all for it, but I think it should be hard-disablable in config,
> > too, for the -tiny people.
>
> I totally agree.
>
> >
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 09:08:39AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> There's one thing that I think is incomplete here. Currently, espfix
> triggers if SS points to the LDT. It's possible for SS to point to
> the LDT even with modify_ldt disabled, and there's a decent amount of
> attack surface the
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 09:03:54AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Is that "default y" going to turn into a "default n" after a grace
> > period?
>
> Let's see how Willy's default-off sysctl plays out. In the long run,
> maybe we'll hav
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 10:42:14AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 09:08:39AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> There's one thing that I think is incomplete here. Currently, espfix
> &
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:04:54PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 09:50:52AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:44:52PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> > I'
Hi Kees,
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:56:12AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> I look forward to the runtime disabling patch. :)
Did you get my response to your comments regarding the proposed patch ?
I can rebase it and update it if needed, I just want to make sure
everyone's on the same line regarding
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 01:42:20PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > Hi Kees,
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:56:12AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> I look forward to the runtime disabling patch. :)
> >
30 matches
Mail list logo
