On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 05:39:42PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> The example has been modified to act like a test in the follow up set. It
> tests
> for the positive case (Did the helper work or not) as opposed to the negative
> case (is the helper able to violate the safety constraints we set
On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 05:39:42PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> The example has been modified to act like a test in the follow up set. It
> tests
> for the positive case (Did the helper work or not) as opposed to the negative
> case (is the helper able to violate the safety constraints we set
On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 12:35:12PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 05:05:27PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> > It was tested with the tracex7 program on x86-64.
>
> it's my fault to start tracexN tradition that turned out to be
> cumbersome, let's not continue it.
On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 12:35:12PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 05:05:27PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> > It was tested with the tracex7 program on x86-64.
>
> it's my fault to start tracexN tradition that turned out to be
> cumbersome, let's not continue it.
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 05:05:27PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> It was tested with the tracex7 program on x86-64.
it's my fault to start tracexN tradition that turned out to be
cumbersome, let's not continue it. Instead could you rename it
to something meaningful? Like test_probe_write_user ?
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 05:05:27PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> It was tested with the tracex7 program on x86-64.
it's my fault to start tracexN tradition that turned out to be
cumbersome, let's not continue it. Instead could you rename it
to something meaningful? Like test_probe_write_user ?
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:53:52AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 07/22/2016 04:14 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> >>This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
> >>It shouldn't be used to implement
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:53:52AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 07/22/2016 04:14 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> >>This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
> >>It shouldn't be used to implement
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:53:52AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 07/22/2016 04:14 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> >>This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
> >>It shouldn't be used to implement
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:53:52AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 07/22/2016 04:14 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> >>This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
> >>It shouldn't be used to implement
On 07/22/2016 04:14 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
It shouldn't be used to implement any kind of security mechanism
because of TOC-TOU attacks, but rather to
On 07/22/2016 04:14 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
It shouldn't be used to implement any kind of security mechanism
because of TOC-TOU attacks, but rather to
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
> It shouldn't be used to implement any kind of security mechanism
> because of TOC-TOU attacks, but rather to debug, divert, and
> manipulate execution of
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:09:17PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
> It shouldn't be used to implement any kind of security mechanism
> because of TOC-TOU attacks, but rather to debug, divert, and
> manipulate execution of
This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
It shouldn't be used to implement any kind of security mechanism
because of TOC-TOU attacks, but rather to debug, divert, and
manipulate execution of semi-cooperative processes.
Although it uses probe_kernel_write, we limit
This allows user memory to be written to during the course of a kprobe.
It shouldn't be used to implement any kind of security mechanism
because of TOC-TOU attacks, but rather to debug, divert, and
manipulate execution of semi-cooperative processes.
Although it uses probe_kernel_write, we limit
16 matches
Mail list logo
