Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <66d6506278121f22c4360110c38ee3653e4fb1c6.camel@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/11] kallsyms: hide layout and expose seed
From:   Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Date:   Mon, 02 Mar 2020 11:19:55 -0800
In-Reply-To: <202003021107.38017F90@keescook>
References: <20200205223950.1212394-1-kristen@linux.intel.com>
         <20200205223950.1212394-10-kristen@linux.intel.com>
         <202002060428.08B14F1@keescook>
         <a915e1eb131551aa766fde4c14de5a3e825af667.camel@linux.intel.com>
         <CAG48ez2SucOZORUhHNxt-9juzqcWjTZRD9E_PhP51LpH1UqeLg@mail.gmail.com>
         <41d7049cb704007b3cd30a3f48198eebb8a31783.camel@linux.intel.com>
         <202003021107.38017F90@keescook>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5 (3.30.5-1.fc29) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-03-02 at 11:08 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 11:01:56AM -0800, Kristen Carlson Accardi
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 20:27 +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> > > https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=%2Fproc%2Fkallsyms&literal=1
> > 
> > I looked through some of these packages as Jann suggested, and it
> > seems
> > like there are several that are using /proc/kallsyms to look for
> > specific symbol names to determine whether some feature has been
> > compiled into the kernel. This practice seems dubious to me,
> > knowing
> > that many kernel symbol names can be changed at any time, but
> > regardless seems to be fairly common.
> 
> Cool, so a sorted censored list is fine for non-root. Would root
> users
> break on a symbol-name-sorted view? (i.e. are two lists needed or can
> we
> stick to one?)
> 

Internally of course we'll always have to have 2 lists. I couldn't find
any examples of even root users needing the list to be in order by
address. At the same time, it feels like a less risky thing to do to
leave root users with the same thing they've always had and only muck
with non-root users.