lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Taint kernel when lve module is loaded
    On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 12:26:41PM -0700, iseletsk@cloudlinux.com wrote:
    > On Friday, June 22, 2012 3:43:23 PM UTC-4, Greg KH wrote:
    > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:22:22PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
    > > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 07:51:42PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
    > > > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:43:59AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > Do you have a pointer to this code anywhere? Lying about the license to
    > > > > > the kernel is a pretty blatent thing to do and I'd like to have some
    > > > > > people follow up on that issue.
    > > > >
    > > > > http://repo.cloudlinux.com/cloudlinux/5.8/updates-testing/x86_64/RPMS/kmod-lve-2.6.18-408.el5.lve1.1.64.2-1.1-10.7.3.el5.x86_64.rpm
    > > > > - there's no corresponding SRPM in
    > > > > http://repo.cloudlinux.com/cloudlinux/5.8/updates-testing/SRPMS/ and
    > > > > upstream apparently refuse to provide source. Alex Lyashkov (Cc:ed) is
    > > > > listed as module author in the metadata.
    > > >
    > > > Hm, and at least one reason it needs to be GPL is due to it using
    > > > symbols I created, no fun.
    > > >
    > > > Alex, can you please provide the source code for this module? Or is the
    > > > license that the code is saying it is, somehow incorrect? If so, can
    > > > you please fix it? If you can't do this, is there someone else I should
    > > > be contacting?
    > >
    > > Also, I almost hate to ask this, but why in the world are you creating
    > > sysfs binary files? I really don't think you should be doing this, as
    > > those are only for firmware and other "pass-through" things the kernel
    > > uses to have userspace talk directly to hardware.
    > >
    > > Odds are you can remove these files, and use the "correct" user/kernel
    > > interface which will result in much better speed and handle things
    > > properly for you, instead of abusing this interface.
    > >
    > > Unless you really are talking directly to hardware, in which case, I'm
    > > kind of interested to see what you are doing here, so the source code
    > > would be greatly appreciated.
    > >
    > > thanks,
    > >
    > > greg k-h
    > > --
    > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    >
    > Greg,
    >
    > We do a "hack", which is not a pretty one, populating /sys with
    > .htaccess files. This is really needed only by shared hosters, where
    > one of the end users on the server, could be a hacker and could create
    > symlinks that would later be followed by apache to read privileged
    > information.

    I don't understand how adding a .htaccess file would solve anything
    here. Are you also adding a .htaccess file to every directory in the
    whole system?

    > A better fix would be fixing the apache. Yet, surprisingly enough --
    > we control kernel on those servers -- but we don't control apache. So
    > -- we tried to secure things for our customers in this particular way.
    > Most likely we will through it out anyway.

    As it's probably not solving anything real, please don't do that :)

    greg k-h


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-06-24 09:21    [W:0.049 / U:0.188 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site