Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:35:21 -1000 From: Jonathon Wright <jonathon.s.wright@gmail.com> To: My Email <jonathon.s.wright@gmail.com>, "freebsd-security@freebsd.org" <freebsd-security@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Transient Memory problem? Message-ID: <CAGX1DMbLSDTmV-VVZ6Aq8Bh-HqFh-XL8aWZFnCr1u47ofWWNtg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130912183206.GK68682@funkthat.com> References: <CAGX1DMbQP=TggYQm-3hra0Od3gjgz5xQ8bEMMrueuhL6kuZMUA@mail.gmail.com> <20130912053559.GF68682@funkthat.com> <979901F9-5F25-4DF1-95A8-32473C55B25F@gmail.com> <20130912183206.GK68682@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm looking into it now, I'm sure I'll have more questions, thanks for the starting point though! On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 8:32 AM, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> wrote: > My Email wrote this message on Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 07:49 -1000: > > My apologies, I have been replying too all, I hope that is the correct > method. > > > > Anyway, that is very interesting information. I'd be extremely > interested in information on customizing malloc and jemalloc. Let me know > where to start. Thanks! > > For jemalloc, look at man malloc: opt.junk > > for kernel malloc, look at sys/kern_malloc.c.. It doesn't look like > there is a knob to turn on kernel malloc filling, but it wouldn't be > hard... > > Though the performance impact of junk filling is very significant... > > > On Sep 11, 2013, at 7:35 PM, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> wrote: > > > > > Jonathon Wright wrote this message on Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 14:15 -1000: > > >> I have posted this question (username-scryptkiddy) in the forums: > > >> http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=41875 > > >> but was suggested to bring it here to the mailing list for discussion. > > >> > > >> Basically, FreeBSD 8.3 (64bit) is what we use in our shop. We were > > >> inspected by a security team and they had issues with FreeBSD's memory > > >> management. > > >> > > >> Namely the transient memory and object reuse areas of FreeBSD. They > claimed > > >> that FreeBSD did not have a Common Criteria (EAL1-4) evaluation > completed, > > >> and therefore was vulnerable to the Transient memory problem. > > > > > > Any system that uses malloc will have difficulties with this as most > > > versions of free will not zero out the memory... You could make > > > modifications to kernel malloc to always zero memory on free, and turn > on > > > the junk feature of jemalloc and that could possibly close this issue > > > for them... > > > > > >> Our higher ups need some sort of documentation / testing that can be > used > > >> to counter this, since changing Operating Systems is not something we > have > > >> time / manpower to do, but might have too based on this supposed > 'finding'. > > >> > > >> The post has all the details. Let me know I need to repost in this as > well. > > > > > > I know that FreeBSD 4.7 and 4.9 has been EAL3 ceritfied. I worked for > > > nCircle a number of years ago, and they got their products EAL3 > > > cerified. > > > > > > Link: > > > > http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org:80/files/epfiles/nCircle%20CR%20v1.0.pdf > > > > > > It is possible someone else has received certification on a newer > version, > > > but I'm not aware of any at this time... > > -- > John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579 > > "All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not." >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGX1DMbLSDTmV-VVZ6Aq8Bh-HqFh-XL8aWZFnCr1u47ofWWNtg>