From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>
Cc: rkrcmar@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: remove printing of token address
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 12:58:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3b2e079-4ed2-dd21-2229-24655d6ea54d@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171009100415.GA12785@eros>
On 09/10/2017 12:04, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 03:49:38AM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>
>>> To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>, rkrcmar@redhat.com
>>> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>
>>> Sent: Monday, October 9, 2017 8:30:14 AM
>>> Subject: [PATCH] KVM: remove printing of token address
>>>
>>> KVM currently prints the address of the consumer token. It is not
>>> immediately clear what benefit it is to see this address. Printing
>>> this address leaks kernel pointers into dmesg and is a security risk.
>>>
>>> Remove the consumer token address from error message output.
>>
>> It should use %pK instead.
>
> Is there any other way we can identify a token? There is some push back against kpt_restrict (as
> used by %pK) at the moment. If there is another sane way to do it perhaps we could consider that,
> else I'll use %pK for v2.
Not really, we know it is an eventfd but you can't go from the struct
eventfd_ctx* (the token) to the corresponding struct file.
I'm not sure about the pushback... I've read your name in
https://lwn.net/Articles/735589/ :) and that article says "the same
effect as a restrictive kptr_restrict setting could be achieved by
searching for (and fixing) every use of unadorned "%p" directives in the
kernel". As I understand it, the push back is against restrictive
kptr_restrict settings, not against using "%pK" _to avoid the need_ for
such a restrictive setting.
Thanks,
Paolo
>> Also, please do the same change on the VFIO
>> side (drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c, call to irq_bypass_register_producer).
>
> Oh, cool. I was wondering where the other side was. Will send v2
>
> thanks,
> Tobin.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-09 10:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-09 6:30 Tobin C. Harding
2017-10-09 7:49 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-10-09 10:04 ` Tobin C. Harding
2017-10-09 10:58 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2017-10-09 23:51 ` Tobin C. Harding
2017-10-10 8:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-10-10 21:49 ` Tobin C. Harding
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=f3b2e079-4ed2-dd21-2229-24655d6ea54d@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=me@tobin.cc \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
/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®