Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1455691

Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open

Show all headers | View raw

* Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:

> > I see 0 up-sides of this approach and, as per the above, a whole bunch of very 
> > serious downsides.
> >
> > A global (esp. default inhibited) knob is too coarse and limiting.
> 
> I haven't suggested it be default inhibit in the upstream Kconfig. And
> having this knob already with the 0, 1, and 2 settings seems
> incomplete to me without this highest level of restriction that 3
> would provide. That seems rather arbitrary to me. :)

The default has no impact on the "it's too coarse and limiting" negative property 
of this patch, which is the show-stopper aspect. Please fix that aspect instead of 
trying to argue around it.

This isn't some narrow debugging mechanism we can turn on/off globally and forget 
about, this is a wide scope performance measurement and event logging 
infrastructure that is being utilized not just by developers but by apps and 
runtimes as well.

> Let me take this another way instead. What would be a better way to provide a 
> mechanism for system owners to disable perf without an LSM? (Since far fewer 
> folks run with an enforcing "big" LSM: I'm seeking as wide a coverage as 
> possible.)

Because in practice what will happen is that if the only option is to do something 
drastic for sekjurity, IT departments will do it - while if there's a more 
flexible mechanism that does not throw out the baby with the bath water that is 
going to be used.

This is as if 20 years ago you had submitted a patch to the early Linux TCP/IP 
networking code to be on/off via a global sysctl switch and told people that 
"in developer mode you can have networking, talk to your admin".

We'd have told you: "this switch is too coarse and limiting, please implement 
something better, like a list of routes which defines which IP ranges are 
accessible, and a privileged range of listen sockets ports and some flexible 
kernel side filtering mechanism to inhibit outgoing/incoming connections".

Global sysctls are way too coarse.

Thanks,

	Ingo

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Jeff Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com> - 2016-07-27 16:50 +0200
  Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-07-27 22:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of  perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-02 12:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of  perf_event_open Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> - 2016-08-02 15:20 +0200
      Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 16:20 +0200
    Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 15:30 +0200
    Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-08-02 23:00 +0200
      Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-08-03 10:30 +0200
        Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 14:30 +0200
          Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 15:00 +0200
          Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-03 15:40 +0200
      Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-03 16:50 +0200
        RE: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@intel.com> - 2016-08-03 17:50 +0200
      Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-08-03 21:30 +0200
        Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-04 00:40 +0200
          Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2016-08-04 05:40 +0200
            Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-04 11:20 +0200
              Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2016-08-04 17:30 +0200
                Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-04 17:40 +0200
      Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 22:00 +0200
        Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2016-08-04 12:40 +0200
          Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 15:50 +0200
            Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-04 16:20 +0200
              Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 17:50 +0200
                Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-04 18:00 +0200
                Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2016-08-04 18:20 +0200
                Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 18:40 +0200
                Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2016-08-04 19:20 +0200
                Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow  further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 19:40 +0200
      Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2016-08-04 01:50 +0200
    Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-02 23:00 +0200
      Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com> - 2016-08-02 23:20 +0200
    Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further  restriction of perf_event_open Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-08-02 23:40 +0200

csiph-web