Re: How trustworthy is that I/O device?

Sean Davis <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.netbsd.devel.security
Message-ID <CA+zS-EJOfKASsGVCO7iAopgPuYkJSf46vAaRqPPf_d+1jyEbCA@mail.gmail.com>
I'd like to have an option like that - it would be nice in instances where
I know a file system is full of errors but want to recover what I can
without a panic, and on the other side of the coin want to panic before
tolerating any detectable inconsistency. This probably digresses a bit from
the security aspects, but I think that sort of option would be of great
general benefit as well as being useful from a security perspective.

What I would personally love to see, from a security perspective, is the
ability to define what sorts of devices I do trust. Does NetBSD have a
mechanism similar to the /dev/disk/by-uuid/ presented in Linux? Taking it a
bit further.. wouldn't it be possible to, for instance, define a certain
vendor:device combo as "accepted" for a USB serial device, and have that be
to the exclusion of others?
I don't wish to spend NetBSD dev time on my own convenience and laziness,
and would happily help out - these simply spring to mind as things I have,
in Linux, taken shortcuts with in the name of convenience that might
(might!) offer some negligible protection (for example, only a uplcom(4)
serial device would be able to fool one of my kernels... that sort of
thing.)

I agree with Matt (both of them) and Erik, and in the spirit of waxing
philosophic, will say that I find it very interesting to find a balance
here given that as a security professional I am also guilty of taking the
easy way out when there is one.



On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:31 PM, matthew green <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> > What I am saying is that you shouldn't trust it.  We shouldn't have
> > underlying assumptions in the code.  We don't in the networking
> > code.  Treat it as if it's probably trying to cause a denial of
> > service.  I'm saying don't panic, either forcibly unmount or treat
> > it as uncacheable and read-only.
>
> solaris introduced "onerror" mount option, that takes options
> like "panic", "unmount", "readonly", etc.
>
> i've always thought that was a good idea we should copy.
>
>
> .mrg.
>



-- 
Sean
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.