Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1503878
| From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open |
| Date | 2016-10-19 17:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <su02w-2rf-135@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rZyjM-F9-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <stgsG-47u-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <stJuF-759-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <stJXH-7yE-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <su02w-2rf-133@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Em Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 12:01:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 05:15:01PM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote: > > It's also worth noting that fine-grained control via a scoped mechanism > > would likely only be used to implement *more restrictions* on Android, > > not to make the feature less aggressive. > > It's desirable for perf events to be disabled by default for non-root > > across the board on Android. > Right, but this is Android. The knob seems to now also live in Debian > (and derived) distros. And there it is utter crap. > It completely defeats having perf for a fairly large segment of > corporate developers who do not get to have root on their own machines > (which is stupid policy but whatever). > It similarly defeats development of self profiling JITs and whatnot. > A capability would allow people to run perf (or another sanctioned > binary), even though in general they cannot do sys_perf_event_open(). But self profiling JITs would be useful for non-developers, on Android (anywhere, really), and for that it would require being able to at least, well, self profile, using sys_perf_event_open() by a normal process, limited to profiling itself, no? This not being possible, self profiling will use some other means, its like sys_perf_event_open() never existed for them. - Arnaldo
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2016-10-17 15:50 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:00 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2016-10-19 16:40 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 17:20 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-10-18 22:50 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 23:20 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-10-19 16:30 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2016-10-19 16:50 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> - 2016-10-19 17:20 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 17:40 +0200
Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow further restriction of perf_event_open Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-10-19 18:20 +0200
csiph-web