Hacker News Reader

Comment by Asmod4n | Hacker News Reader

The main reason why it gets disabled is fixed now, the latest RC got cBPF support and as such you can restrict what OPs can be run now instead of just fully disabling it.

View on HN

Well the reason it's disabled now is the recent history of pretty bad vulnerabilities. It probably needs to go a while without new vulnerabilities before it makes sense to enable by default. It's pretty complex completely unsafe C code, after all.

Then just disable that singular function which causes the issue instead of a whole kernel subsystem. The current release can do that.

What's the singular function that has a chance of turning out to be exploitable in the future?

With seccomp you can disable a single syscall which might be exploitable since you didn’t get around to patch your kernel, with cBPF you can now do the same for io_uring

And which single syscall might be exploitable? I don't wanna wait until after an exploit to disable it

Nothing stops you from disabling everything you don’t need and now io_uring offers that per OP too.

I don’t get what you mean, in the past it was all or nothing, now you can disable every single operation selectively.

Gotta read the usual sources to find out what you gotta disable on your machines, like you have to for every single syscall since forever.

I mean exactly what I said. How do I know which parts of io_uring won't have security vulnerabilities discovered in the future?

Yes, but what parts of io_uring are safe to not disable?

It's not complex actually, but it is C...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com