Live data from Hacker News

For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

openwall.com

411–420 of 578 posts

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#411
post #390
post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be best if distros kept tap on kernel changes and update as soon as possible when they see a security issue fixed. Sending emails to some big distros would still result with e.g. Gentoo not getting that info because they are not a big distro.

The kernel maintainers don't flag "security fixes" as special, and they have a well-thought-out reason for that, see many other comments in this thread.

That, and they flag pretty much any random patch with a CVE these days, making it harder for distro maintainers to keep up.

For this specific "bug" they took care to not mention any security angle in the commit message, making it extremely hard for an outsider to even realize this was a critical patch. I assume this was because they wanted to push the fix without breaking embargo.

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#412
Interesting comment by Greg Kroah-Hartman when asked why the kernel team doesn't notify distros directly

> Nope, sorry, we are NOT allowed to notify anyone about anything "ahead of time" otherwise we will have to tell everyone about everything. That's the only policy by which all the legal/governmental agencies have agreed to allow us to operate in, so we are stuck with it.

I'd be interested in knowing more about that policy... Seems that there should be exceptions for the major distros.

Of course, major distros who have contracts with SLA could also pay for someone to be on the kernel security team and get a heads up like that..

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#414
post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say all distros should be notified, for that exact reason. I listed a handful of major fistros.

Who gets to decide who the lucky few are?

Sounds like a job for the Linux Foundation maybe?

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's one thing to report a vulnerability, another entirely to make a crazy exploit available for any tom, dick, and harry to take and use. It was irresponsible of whoever came up with it to release it in the world without first giving major distros a head's up.

Bashing on the reporter is pointless feel-good. This is a massive vuln. It was 4 weeks after Kernel had a patch. They had no way to know if others parties had also discovered the vuln. Lord Knows how many millions of systems could already have been rooted. The reporter is not their minion. If I call 911 to report a fire at an oil storage facility - and they ask me to alert the hospital, then phone the neighboring cou…

Great metaphor.

I'd hate to be involved in any emergency services. Too many people have opinions on how things should have been done.

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#416
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they want to be seen as responsible rather than opportunistic, then yeah, they should do a proper coordinated disclosure. Sure, they have no legal obligation to disclose, but we all also have no legal obligation to buy their services. Blacklisting bad actors like this is the right move to discourage this kind of behavior.

> they should do a proper coordinated disclosure. they did a proper coordinated disclosure, following the industry standard 90+30 process. that is why the exploit dropped 30 days after the patch landed. the kernel team should have communicated with their downstream about the importance of the patch. that is the kernel security team's responsibility -- and they are much better positioned to do that than crossing your…

how many times it has to be said that it is impossible for linux kernel to communicate with anything but a minuscule portion of its downstream and _that_ has been done?

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#417
post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, you’re saying “system is working as designed”, and I’m agreeing, but I’m saying “the system as designed kind of sucks, how can we make it better”?

I disagree that it sucks. It leverages a ton of people putting in their time and resources, and relies on system operators being active participants. This vulnerability is, for some threat models, a really big deal. A security group found the vulnerability. They disclosed it. It was patched. Folks here have gotten all kinds of bent out of shape that the groups involved didnt do things in the way each internet comment…

> This vulnerability is, for some threat models, a really big deal.

This vulnerability is, for other threat models, a death sentence.

> A security group found the vulnerability. They disclosed it. It was patched.

It was patched only after some people who should have been notified well in advance happened to notice something was up. That is NOT HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK.

For as long as the unpatched window remains open, skids will mess around and break things. Organized crime teams will use it for some really nasty hacking/ransomware/exfil/extortion/whatever. I guarantee you, this vuln is powerful and widespread enough that intel orgs will use it to kill targets, if they haven't already been using it for years. And if they have, we can just bank on them pulling out all the stops to take advantage of the remaining time for wreaking havoc. Make a project out of it and see if you can guess some of the future headlines.

Certain folks might not care much because they are citizens of one or more of those orgs' nations, so those targets are welcome to die in their opinion. That's fine. You do you, I'll do me, we'll all just go on doing our thing. But it's all fun and games until the wrong target gets hit and now there's a pact between the Germans and the Austrians being invoked and a few dozen million Europeans die. Or a geopolitical hotspot flares up and overnight 20% of the global petroleum supply chain grinds to a halt. Use your imagination. This vuln is a digital magic wand that is trivially usable to cast Avada Kedavra and somebody neglected to tell 99.99% of the Good Guys about it.

How is this different from any other day? Because now we've got a world-changing vuln out in the wild with no distro mitigation on day 1, and who the hell knows how many unscrupulous actors poised to take advantage of it before the fun and games stops. There will be no adults in the room when the miscreants decide to deploy while they still can.

Is this vuln going to start the next world war? Probably not. I don't expect it to and I hope and pray it doesn't. But leaving a vuln like this undisclosed to the very people whose job it is to protect us all is playing with fire. Not matches; more like a 10-grams-less-than-critical mass of plutonium.

sam is right to be pissed and he's doing a very good job of hiding it, because he knows that his users are at the mercy of TPTB in the Linux kernel world. Somebody's head needs to roll for this, and I don't mean some dude the CIA wants to hax0r because he's next on the list.

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The situation with e.g. BlueHammer is fundamentally different: there, the only party that could act on it (Microsoft) ignored them. In this case, the parties that could act on it weren't notified at all. I'm also not proposing delaying the disclosure to the general public at all. They already waited 30 days with that, that's fine. Just look a bit further than your checklist of only contacting upstream, and send a mai…

Downstream vulnerability disclosure is a negotiation between the downstreams and the upstreams. It is not the job of a vulnerability researcher to map this out perfectly (or at all).

Yes and that's why the current system where security researchers are expected to reach out to the distro mailing list is flawed and instead there should be a defined pipeline for the kernel security team to give a heads up.

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#419
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No: your posture with respect to having to cycle servers is a super complicated subject and you address it both with process and with architecture (for instance: you can be blasé about things like CopyFail if you don't allow multitenant shared-kernel in your design in the first place). But no matter what process and design you have, if you're hosting sensitive workloads, you always have to be in a position where you…

I find it curious to call someone dropping a weaponized root exploit before major distros or even LTS kernel git branches have patches ready "good guys". This could have been handled with much more grace.

To be fair, once Xint gave the heads up and the kernel team committed a patch, what was Xint supposed to do? Keep asking the kernel security team to backport patches for the LTS kernels?

As soon as a patch is committed, the clock starts ticking, the exploit will be discovered by reverse engineering recent commits. The commit was made on April 1st, Xint disclosed it on the 29th. If the Kernel Security team had wanted to, they had 28 days to backport patches in the LTS branches...

So, I wouldn't put any blame on Xint there.

Re: For Linux kernel vulnerabilities, there is no heads-up to distributions

#420
post #396

Hyperbola GNU was save because they still use Python 3.8 for both political and stable reasons.

Python 3.10 is only used for the exploit. You can easily rewrite it for 3.8 as well. The vulnerability itself does not require Python at all.
Post reply on HN