[gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Marek Szuba]

Dear everyone,

Seeing as in the end this USE flag is not going anywhere in spite of 
Gentoo no longer providing PaX-capable kernel sources, could we please 
rename it (e.g. to 'pax-kernel') so that it no longer contains a 
disallowed character. I understand the main reason this hasn't been done 
yet is that we expected it might disappear altogether.

-- 
Marecki

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[David Seifert]

On Tue, 2021-06-22 at 10:35 +0100, Marek Szuba wrote:
> Dear everyone,
> 
> Seeing as in the end this USE flag is not going anywhere in spite of 
> rename it (e.g. to 'pax-kernel') so that it no longer contains a 
> disallowed character. I understand the main reason this hasn't been
> done 
> yet is that we expected it might disappear altogether.

+1, I like it, let's do it. I consider the tradeoff in this case much
for renaming it, given that the userbase will be minute (compared to say
the python targets).

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1199 bytes --]

>>>>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2021, Marek Szuba wrote:

> Seeing as in the end this USE flag is not going anywhere in spite of
> Gentoo no longer providing PaX-capable kernel sources, could we please 
> rename it (e.g. to 'pax-kernel') so that it no longer contains a
> disallowed character. I understand the main reason this hasn't been
> done yet is that we expected it might disappear altogether.

+1 for renaming to pax-kernel.

A related question, the pax_kernel flag is still used by these packages:

   app-emulation/virtualbox
   app-emulation/virtualbox-modules
   dev-java/icedtea
   dev-lang/mlton
   dev-lang/mono
   dev-lang/smlnj
   dev-libs/libffi
   dev-libs/libffi-compat
   media-sound/spotify
   net-libs/nodejs

From my past experience with PaX support in Emacs, things used to break
on a regular basis [1]. So I wonder, how is the status of PaX support in
the packages listed above? Do their maintainers actually test them with
a PaX kernel (which would be a third-party kernel, I suppose)? If not,
maybe the flag should be removed from these untested packages?

Ulrich

[1] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/4b5000ef34b506e536b7841ffa17aa39

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Mike Gilbert]

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 12:06 PM Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2021, Marek Szuba wrote:
>
> > Seeing as in the end this USE flag is not going anywhere in spite of
> > Gentoo no longer providing PaX-capable kernel sources, could we please
> > rename it (e.g. to 'pax-kernel') so that it no longer contains a
> > disallowed character. I understand the main reason this hasn't been
> > done yet is that we expected it might disappear altogether.
>
> +1 for renaming to pax-kernel.
>
> A related question, the pax_kernel flag is still used by these packages:
>
>    app-emulation/virtualbox
>    app-emulation/virtualbox-modules
>    dev-java/icedtea
>    dev-lang/mlton
>    dev-lang/mono
>    dev-lang/smlnj
>    dev-libs/libffi
>    dev-libs/libffi-compat
>    media-sound/spotify
>    net-libs/nodejs
>
> From my past experience with PaX support in Emacs, things used to break
> on a regular basis [1]. So I wonder, how is the status of PaX support in
> the packages listed above? Do their maintainers actually test them with
> a PaX kernel (which would be a third-party kernel, I suppose)? If not,
> maybe the flag should be removed from these untested packages?

ebuild maintainers are rarely responsible for the PaX-related
workarounds that end up in ebuilds. A better question would be if
*anybody* is using these packages with a PaX-enabled kernel, and
that's more difficult to answer.

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Thomas Deutschmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 545 bytes --]

FYI:

The PaX community in Gentoo is still big and active.

Many Gentoo users received free access to upstream sources or became 
paying customers.

It's just not available for everyone for free/without registration 
anymore. But it is still a thing in Gentoo.


> So I wonder, how is the status of PaX support in
> the packages listed above?

I can only speak for icedtea and nodejs which are working fine.


-- 
Regards,
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Matt Turner]

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 3:19 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@gentoo.org> wrote:
> The PaX community in Gentoo is still big and active.
>
> Many Gentoo users received free access to upstream sources or became
> paying customers.
>
> It's just not available for everyone for free/without registration
> anymore. But it is still a thing in Gentoo.

Can you substantiate that claim?

There was a pax-kernel USE flag on Mesa and I don't recall anyone
saying a word when I removed it.

If there are paying customers that have PaX kernels, perhaps they'd be
interested in providing some support for Gentoo if we're being asked
to retain support for something we cannot test.

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 871 bytes --]

> > The PaX community in Gentoo is still big and active.
> > 
> > Many Gentoo users received free access to upstream sources or became
> > paying customers.
> > 
> > It's just not available for everyone for free/without registration
> > anymore. But it is still a thing in Gentoo.
> 
> Can you substantiate that claim?
> 
> There was a pax-kernel USE flag on Mesa and I don't recall anyone
> saying a word when I removed it.
> 
> If there are paying customers that have PaX kernels, perhaps they'd be
> interested in providing some support for Gentoo if we're being asked
> to retain support for something we cannot test.

Summary from the replies so far: 
* either noone is using it, 
* or noone is willing to admit using it.

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer
(council, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Matt Turner]

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 11:43 PM Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 3:19 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > The PaX community in Gentoo is still big and active.
> >
> > Many Gentoo users received free access to upstream sources or became
> > paying customers.
> >
> > It's just not available for everyone for free/without registration
> > anymore. But it is still a thing in Gentoo.
>
> Can you substantiate that claim?
>
> There was a pax-kernel USE flag on Mesa and I don't recall anyone
> saying a word when I removed it.
>
> If there are paying customers that have PaX kernels, perhaps they'd be
> interested in providing some support for Gentoo if we're being asked
> to retain support for something we cannot test.

I'd still like an answer to any of this.

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Thomas Deutschmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2355 bytes --]

On 2021-06-23 08:43, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 3:19 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> The PaX community in Gentoo is still big and active.
>>
>> Many Gentoo users received free access to upstream sources or became
>> paying customers.
>>
>> It's just not available for everyone for free/without registration
>> anymore. But it is still a thing in Gentoo.
> 
> Can you substantiate that claim?

I am probably not the right person to answer that, given that I was 
never active in Gentoo's hardened/PaX project but let me try: When I got 
in touch with that stuff (via Debian) and was looking for help, I always 
run into a community full of helpful Gentoo users.

The project itself always had a very good connection with the Gentoo 
project. Before they stopped providing unrestricted access, the Gentoo 
PaX/hardened community was around ~30 *active* people with additional 
~40-60 changing people hanging around which I believe is a lot for such 
a niche.

That's why upstream also mentioned Gentoo in 
https://grsecurity.net/passing_the_baton.php.

Regarding numbers: I am not sure what you are expecting. All I can tell 
you is that people who were active, interested and probably known to 
upstream had the chance to get free access for their personal use (there 
was even an offer for Gentoo infrastructure...). I don't know how many 
are still using Gentoo.


> There was a pax-kernel USE flag on Mesa and I don't recall anyone
> saying a word when I removed it.

As you probably know, I am not a Linux desktop user (yet). My complete 
experience with that PaX stuff is limited to servers.


> If there are paying customers that have PaX kernels, perhaps they'd be
> interested in providing some support for Gentoo if we're being asked
> to retain support for something we cannot test.

Yeah, would be nice to hear something from Gentoo hardened project at 
all (I am looking at you, mschiff, zorry or blueness ;)). I think 
slashbeast could also provide more information.

I still remember when I reworked firefox/thunderbird ebuild and broke 
PaX marking there (https://bugs.gentoo.org/756679). So yes, we have at 
least some users ;-)


-- 
Regards,
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Matt Turner]

On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 7:41 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@gentoo.org> wrote:
> As you probably know, I am not a Linux desktop user (yet). My complete
> experience with that PaX stuff is limited to servers.

Maybe I've misunderstood what you meant. You don't use Linux on the desktop?

But, you maintain Firefox? I'm definitely confused :)

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Thomas Deutschmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1105 bytes --]

On 2021-07-07 05:05, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 7:41 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> As you probably know, I am not a Linux desktop user (yet). My complete
>> experience with that PaX stuff is limited to servers.
> 
> Maybe I've misunderstood what you meant. You don't use Linux on the desktop?
> 
> But, you maintain Firefox? I'm definitely confused :)

No, I became Firefox maintainer by accident via security project when 
former devs weren't available and I started to help out.

I actually bought a notebook a few years ago just to be able to do more 
testing (I have a lot of experience with Selenium where I am using the 
browser in headless mode but when you want to improve desktop 
integration...). This also enabled me to become a test user for leio's 
GNOME 3.30 work which was a great experience.

My Gentoo desktop usage has increased a lot since then but Linux still 
isn't my *primary* desktop platform (yet).


-- 
Regards,
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Michał Górny]

On Wed, 2021-06-23 at 00:19 +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> The PaX community in Gentoo is still big and active.

Do you have any evidence to prove that?  The activity on PaX-related
bugs seems to disagree with you.  A 'big and active' community should
probably result in many patches and fixed bugs, shouldn't it?

> Many Gentoo users received free access to upstream sources or became 
> paying customers.

How many?  Is it actually such a large number to claim that
the community is 'big'?  I suppose that in the past PaX users might have
been a significant subset of Gentoo users but not today.

> It's just not available for everyone for free/without registration 
> anymore. But it is still a thing in Gentoo.

Your comment makes it sounds like 'just registering' is an option.
The website seems to disagree with that, pretty clearly saying it's
a yearly subscription.  How much?  They don't say but it's reasonable to
assume it's a steep price.  Wouldn't be surprised if people are
forbidden from saying.

But even if they offered me a free copy I wouldn't take it.  They have
violated the principles of GPL and harmed the FLOSS world.  If you care
about open source, you wouldn't pay them a broken penny.  If you do, you
just support their actions and soon enough more GPL projects will figure
out that they can steal all their contributions and declare themselves
'keep paying and do not share the code as GPL permits you to'.

Let's not forget that their patches are generally 'pure garbage' sold as
'extra secure' [1].

Now, how is all of that even relevant to the topic at hand?  Are you
saying that because you have a grsec subscription, you're actually going
to help out with something?  Or just complain when things get in the way
of people who don't have one and who don't care the slightest bit?
> 

[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2540934.html

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1346 bytes --]

>>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2021, Michał Górny wrote:

>> It's just not available for everyone for free/without registration 
>> anymore. But it is still a thing in Gentoo.

> Your comment makes it sounds like 'just registering' is an option.
> The website seems to disagree with that, pretty clearly saying it's
> a yearly subscription.  How much?  They don't say but it's reasonable to
> assume it's a steep price.  Wouldn't be surprised if people are
> forbidden from saying.

Apparently it was $17k per year, in 2016:
https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-05/msg00114.html

> But even if they offered me a free copy I wouldn't take it.  They have
> violated the principles of GPL and harmed the FLOSS world.  If you care
> about open source, you wouldn't pay them a broken penny.  If you do, you
> just support their actions and soon enough more GPL projects will figure
> out that they can steal all their contributions and declare themselves
> 'keep paying and do not share the code as GPL permits you to'.

This has been discussed at length, and I don't think we need to
reiterate it here.

My point was that most developers cannot test if the pax_kernel flag in
a given package does what it should. IMHO the consequence is that we
can no longer consider PaX a supported configuration.

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Sergei Trofimovich]

On Tue, 22 Jun 2021 10:35:12 +0100
Marek Szuba <marecki@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Dear everyone,
> 
> Seeing as in the end this USE flag is not going anywhere in spite of 
> Gentoo no longer providing PaX-capable kernel sources, could we please 
> rename it (e.g. to 'pax-kernel') so that it no longer contains a 
> disallowed character. I understand the main reason this hasn't been done 
> yet is that we expected it might disappear altogether.

Just renaming pax_kernel to pax-kernel for dev-libs/libffi will likely
brick a system on W^X kernel on first world update. python will
probably start crashing instantly. Unless user explicitly notices that
they need to enable a new flag.

Other packages should be less problematic to just switch over.

One of the steps forward for libffi would be to add extra USE=pax-kernel
with REQUIRED_USE="pax_kernel? ( pax-kernel )" or 'die' equivalent.

The specifics should ideally be handled by hardened@ team. Otherwise we
can do 'use pax_kernel || die' libffi experiment if nobody objects. Say,
in a few days.

-- 

  Sergei

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Marek Szuba]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 318 bytes --]

On 2021-06-22 19:01, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:

> One of the steps forward for libffi would be to add extra USE=pax-kernel
> with REQUIRED_USE="pax_kernel? ( pax-kernel )" or 'die' equivalent.

Sounds like a good idea to me, that way people who don't pay attention 
to news items will notice.

-- 
Marecki


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Sergei Trofimovich]

On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 10:46:00 +0100
Marek Szuba <marecki@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 2021-06-22 19:01, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> 
> > One of the steps forward for libffi would be to add extra USE=pax-kernel
> > with REQUIRED_USE="pax_kernel? ( pax-kernel )" or 'die' equivalent.  
> 
> Sounds like a good idea to me, that way people who don't pay attention 
> to news items will notice.

It's now part of libffi-3.4_rc1:

  # If you are USE=pax_kernel user you really want USE=pax-kernel as well.
  # That's a flag rename: https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/273f5ec9ebc8075f6ee8d8cdda9e759e
  REQUIRED_USE="pax_kernel? ( pax-kernel )"

  https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=0b2c89773e0df20c0c770b6d8620564b76468578

-- 

  Sergei

Re: [gentoo-dev] 'pax_kernel' USE flag

[Marek Szuba]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 480 bytes --]

On 2021-06-22 10:35, Marek Szuba wrote:

> Seeing as in the end this USE flag is not going anywhere in spite of 
> Gentoo no longer providing PaX-capable kernel sources, could we please 
> rename it (e.g. to 'pax-kernel') so that it no longer contains a 
> disallowed character.

Done. Now the old name only persists in dev-libs/libffi owing to the 
compatibility guard proposed by slyfox, and I'd say it should be removed 
even from there in a month.

-- 
Marecki


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]