[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c, Video DVD playback support
    On Monday 24 January 2005 21:39, you wrote:
    : > This is true for protected media because of the authentication
    : > process needed between "host" and DVD device. IMHO,
    : > the classification of the opcodes
    : >
    : > a. GPCMD_SEND_KEY and
    : >
    : > as only "save for write" is wrong.
    : You need to explain why you think that is so, since this is the core of
    : the argument. The only thing I can say is that perhaps SEND_KEY should
    : even be root only, since it has a fairly large scope.

    This is exactly the point: if the kernel wants to be safe, the
    authentication procedure should be totally implemented in the kernel
    and be protected against further changes via "alternative" ways...
    but it isn't now and probably won't be although it could be.

    On the other hand I don't think it is a good idea to let only
    root read a video DVD an a Linux system.

    : > Furthermore, if you use
    : > a. cdrom_ioctl (..., DVD_AUTH,...) instead of
    : > b. cdrom_ioctl (..., CDROM_SEND_PACKET,...)
    : > -> scsi_cmd_ioctl()-> sg_io()-> verify_command()
    : >
    : > the same authentication procedure works as expected on a
    : > RONLY opened device!
    : DVD_AUTH by-passes scsi_ioctl.c, so yes.
    :The problem is that it is policy, and it has to
    : be restrictive to be safe.

    Yes, and with this "alternative" way to to things in the kernel
    a user can complete circumvent the restrictive policy now
    implemented in verify_command(). So you are securing
    the backdoor and leaving the frontdoor completely open, right?

    Now if safety is top priority, than

    a. the authentication must be implemented by the kernel and

    b. there should be no other way to access the device and
    completely circumvent the policy enforcement.


    we both agree, that in a situation where a user has exclusive
    access to the device it would be OK to issue a SEND_KEY, even
    if he uses RONLY mode for access.

    It is as you wrote a silly situation but the current implementation
    don't augment security but instead prevents "innocent" software
    to continue to run.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.022 / U:6.988 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site