Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-77545-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Feedback-ID: i21f147d5:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:49:26 -0700
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.pizza>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Guixiong Wei <guixiongwei@gmail.com>,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] leaking_addresses: Provide mechanism to scan binary files
Message-ID: <Zdfdhl78xgBuZdXu@tycho.pizza>
References: <20240218173809.work.286-kees@kernel.org>
 <ZddnEtnxhJsafdcF@tycho.pizza>
 <202402221249.FA17A8940@keescook>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <202402221249.FA17A8940@keescook>

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 01:00:40PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > This does bring up some interesting questions. From off-list
> > discussions with Tobin, I believe he is not particularly interested in
> > maintaining this script any more. I was never set up to do the PRs
> > myself, I agreed to be a reviewer to help Tobin out. I'm happy to
> > adopt it if that makes sense, but I'm curious about the future of the
> > script:
> > 
> > 1. is it useful? (seems like yes if you're adding features)
> 
> Yes, LKP runs it as part of 0-day, and it's found leaks in the past[1].
> (Though its usage could be improved.)

Oh! That is good news :)

> > 2. does it make sense to live here as a separate thing? should we
> >    perhaps run it as part of kselftests or similar? I think that e.g.
> >    681ff0181bbf ("x86/mm/init/32: Stop printing the virtual memory
> >    layout") was not discovered with this script, but maybe if we put it
> >    inline with some other stuff people regularly run more of these would
> >    fall out? Maybe it makes sense to live somewhere else entirely
> >    (syzkaller)? I can probably set up some x86/arm64 infra to run it
> >    regularly, but that won't catch other less popular arches.
> 
> We could certainly do that. It would need some work to clean it up,
> though -- it seems like it wasn't designed to run as root (which is how
> LKP runs it, and likely how at least some CIs would run it).
> 
> > 3. perl. I'm mostly not a perl programmer, but would be happy to
> >    rewrite it in python pending the outcome of discussion above.
> 
> I am not a Perl fan either. It does work as-is, though. Address leaks,
> while worth fixing, are relatively low priority over all, so I wouldn't
> prioritize a rewrite very highly.

Yep, fair enough.

Tycho