From: David Wagner <daw@cs.berkeley.edu>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Security: information leaks in /proc enable keystroke recovery
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 15:21:27 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200908152221.n7FMLRuw005799@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu> (raw)
At Usenix Security 2009, two researchers announced last week a new
security vulnerability in multi-user Linux systems. They demonstrated
that one user can, in many cases, recover partial information about
the keystrokes that another user types into applications running on
that system. For instance, they demonstrate how a malicious user can
recover partial information about SSH passwords typed by other users,
reducing the password search space by a factor of 250-2000x in
their experiments. Thus, this could facilitate password recovery.
Question: Are there any plans to modify the Linux kernel to defend
against this kind of attack?
The paper is here:
http://www.usenix.org/events/sec09/tech/full_papers/zhang.pdf
In a nutshell, they exploit the fact that many files in /proc are
world-readable yet contain sensitive information that can leak information
about inter-keystroke timings. For instance, /proc/$PID/stat reveals the
ESP and EIP registers of the associated process, and is world-readable.
/proc/pid/status is also mentioned as revealing information that could
be exploited in these attacks.
Based on my understanding of their work, it sounds like some of
the information on those files should perhaps not be world-readable.
It's not clear to me that it's reasonable for the kernel to reveal ESP,
EIP, and other sensitive information about process behavior to everyone
on the same system.
Are folks already aware of these vulnerabilities? Is there any work
underway to try to address the issues identified in the Usenix Security
paper?
next reply other threads:[~2009-08-15 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-15 22:21 David Wagner [this message]
2009-08-15 23:25 ` Oliver Pinter
2009-08-16 20:06 ` Robert Watson
2009-08-16 21:09 ` David Wagner
2009-08-16 23:25 ` Robert N. M. Watson
2009-08-17 0:58 ` David Wagner
2009-08-17 10:11 ` Robert Watson
2009-08-19 1:57 ` Dag-Erling Smørgrav
2009-08-16 0:33 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-16 0:44 ` David Wagner
2009-08-16 1:33 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-16 8:18 ` david
2009-08-17 0:31 ` David Wagner
2009-08-17 2:22 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-17 2:45 ` James Morris
2009-08-17 3:16 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-08-21 14:02 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-22 17:22 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2009-08-17 1:39 ` Amerigo Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200908152221.n7FMLRuw005799@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu \
--to=daw@cs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®