Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 67

Thread: Linux Kernel Exploit Affecting Linux 3.3 To Linux 3.8

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibidem View Post
    1: If you're on Debian Wheezy or Ubuntu 12.04, you're still affected.
    The commit introducing this is actually from just before 3.2.
    2: The patch was committed by a Red Hat employee, but was written by a Parallels employee.
    Code:
    sock_diag: Initial skeleton
    author	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>	
    	Tue, 6 Dec 2011 07:58:03 +0000 (07:58 +0000)
    committer	David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>	
    	Tue, 6 Dec 2011 18:58:01 +0000 (13:58 -0500)
    commit	d366477a52f1df29fa066ffb18e4e6101ee2ad04
    tree	267a65f626108423f73ef6dc0040b3b3171f7b45	tree | snapshot
    parent	f13c95f0e255e6d21762259875295cc212e6bc32	commit | diff
    Now I'm off to build a new kernel for my Squeeze system*.
    1 is incorrect: it dates to a month before 3.2, but was committed to net-next rather than Torvald's tree.


    *I don't run straight Squeeze: I use an upstream LTS kernel, currently 3.4, plus several backports and built-from-git packages.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wargames View Post
    A CIA agent for sure. Linus should really investigate kernel contributors before letting them submit code, because who knows how many CIA agents and/or M$ employees are willing to introduce backdoors in Linux ?
    Why don't you go then and carefully review each commit this CIA agent has submitted, there's bound to be more exploits if your hypothesis is true... really, you'd be doing us all a huge favour, we'd probably build you a statue or something.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    87

    Default

    heh, just upgraded 3.2.12 to 3.7.9 ... oh well ... will have to look at gentoo updates/news

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    Well, how do they say? "Open source is more secure because more people can see what's going on". Hahaha. Great.
    I wonder how many security flaws were identified in Windows(privately or openly) in the last year compared to Linux/BSD.
    Somehow, I think this is in the opensource's favor.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    327

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by haplo602 View Post
    heh, just upgraded 3.2.12 to 3.7.9 ... oh well ... will have to look at gentoo updates/news
    Jeez was this a server or something, that's a good leap there!

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    Well, how do they say? "Open source is more secure because more people can see what's going on". Hahaha. Great.
    And it is. It's far more secure than proprietary crap.

  7. #27

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    Actually doing that is a rather interesting way to do a microkernel and there's this project http://www.mosa-project.org/ and Microsoft Midori doing a managed microkernel in C#. I'll definitely be interested to see if either of those actually goes anywhere.
    So, they use shit to make even worse and slower shit than winblows is?

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    I was just going to say that C has got to be the worst language imaginable.
    It's far better than c# and probably the best for kernel programing.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    179

    Default

    This news is really alarming since according to my understanding this spcific bug can only happen as a result of really sloppy coding practices or deliberate sabotage!?

    Why has not Linux foundation put up some prize money for reported 0-day vulnerabilities? Would it be such a burden for such an organization to promise 10k$ for every submitted 0-day root exploit or something similar? 10k would be huge money for a security researcher but pocket change for Linux foundation. This would encourage the 0-day to be reported rather than sold for profit.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Detructor View Post
    they should port the whole kernel to C#/.NET. There you got a nice garbage collector and don't have to worry about strange things like pointers and a buffer/memoryoverflow get's a nice exception.

    ok, but seriously...someone should implement a background garbage collector and some meta-error handling in C and C++. That'd get rid of those 'security holes' instantely.
    Sure, using some type of managed array in the case of this function would have prevented this *specific* security hole, but the performance hit of using only managed array within the kernel would have made it far from being acceptable and this is only one *specific* attack vector. (Let alone using fully managed programming language inside the kernel *).

    Any one that ever written large chunks of kernel code knows that you do your best to verify user-supplied parameters, but being human, you will fuck up from time to time.

    - Gilboa
    * ... In which case most attack vectors will simply target the managed language VM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •