[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#46709: marked as done (Mach lets processes write to I/O ports)



Your message dated Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:32:18 -0800
with message-id <E1EwpRy-0000oo-OG@spohr.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#46709: fixed in gnumach 1:20050801-3
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Oct 1999 18:14:43 +0000
Received: (qmail 18320 invoked from network); 5 Oct 1999 18:14:43 -0000
Received: from smtp1.kolumbus.fi (193.229.0.36)
  by master.debian.org with SMTP; 5 Oct 1999 18:14:43 -0000
Received: from PC486.Niemitalo.LAN (mail@m165m1oul.dial.kolumbus.fi [193.229.226.165])
	by smtp1.kolumbus.fi (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id VAA25603;
	Tue, 5 Oct 1999 21:14:40 +0300 (EET DST)
Received: from kalle by PC486.Niemitalo.LAN with local (Exim 3.03 #1 (Debian))
	id 11YZ6k-0000jz-00; Tue, 05 Oct 1999 21:14:38 +0300
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Mach lets processes write to I/O ports
References: <199910011516.LAA18625@frob.com>
X-Accept-Language: fi;q=1.0, en;q=0.9, sv;q=0.5, de;q=0.1
X-URL: http://stekt.oulu.fi/~tosi/
From: Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <tosi@ees2.oulu.fi>
Date: 05 Oct 1999 21:14:38 +0300
Message-ID: <87905hu12p.fsf@PC486.Niemitalo.LAN>
Lines: 58

Package: gnumach
Version: 1:1.2-1.kn.1
Severity: normal

(The version was 1:1.2-1 before I applied my Alt Gr patch and
disabled almost all devices.)

Roland McGrath <roland@frob.com> writes:

> > I then
> > removed the call, but the program could still write to the ports.
> > So maybe it's automatic after all.
> 
> Hmm, it shouldn't be.  It would be good if someone could look into this
> (maybe you can get a test case together and file a BTS report?), but I'm
> not going to worry about it for now.

So, here is the report.

The following program should not work.  Mach shouldn't let
processes read or write I/O ports unless they have explicitly
asked for permission.  But the program works.  Worse, it doesn't
even require root privileges.

-------------------- ../util.h --------------------
/* This isn't my original util.h, just something to make
   ioport.c compile without -D flags.  */
#define PACKAGE "colortext"
#define VERSION "0.2"
#define _(s) s
#define N_(s) s

-------------------- ioport.c --------------------
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <argp.h>		/* struct argp */
#include <mach/machine/pio.h>	/* outb */
#include <unistd.h>		/* sleep */
#include "../util.h"		/* _ */

const char *argp_program_version = "ioport (" PACKAGE ") " VERSION;
const char *argp_program_bug_address = "<tosi@stekt.oulu.fi>";

int
main (int argc, char **argv)
{
  static const struct argp argp = { 0, 0, 0,
    N_("Move the cursor to the top left corner for a second "
       "by outputting values to EGA I/O ports.") };
  argp_parse (&argp, argc, argv, 0, 0, 0);

  outb (0x3D4, 0x0E);		/* cursor position high byte register */
  outb (0x3D5, 0);
  outb (0x3D4, 0x0F);		/* cursor position low byte register */
  outb (0x3D5, 0);

  sleep (1);
  return 0;
}
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 46709-close) by bugs.debian.org; 11 Jan 2006 23:41:42 +0000
>From katie@ftp-master.debian.org Wed Jan 11 15:41:42 2006
Return-path: <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1EwpRy-0000oo-OG; Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:32:18 -0800
From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
To: 46709-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.65 $
Subject: Bug#46709: fixed in gnumach 1:20050801-3
Message-Id: <E1EwpRy-0000oo-OG@spohr.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:32:18 -0800
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Source: gnumach
Source-Version: 1:20050801-3

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
gnumach, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

gnumach-dbg_20050801-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/gnumach/gnumach-dbg_20050801-3_i386.deb
gnumach-dev_20050801-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/gnumach/gnumach-dev_20050801-3_i386.deb
gnumach-udeb_20050801-3_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/g/gnumach/gnumach-udeb_20050801-3_i386.udeb
gnumach_20050801-3.diff.gz
  to pool/main/g/gnumach/gnumach_20050801-3.diff.gz
gnumach_20050801-3.dsc
  to pool/main/g/gnumach/gnumach_20050801-3.dsc
gnumach_20050801-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/gnumach/gnumach_20050801-3_i386.deb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 46709@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> (supplier of updated gnumach package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:54:05 +0200
Source: gnumach
Binary: gnumach gnumach-dev gnumach-udeb gnumach-dbg
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1:20050801-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Hurd Maintainers <debian-hurd@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
Description: 
 gnumach    - The GNU version of the Mach microkernel
 gnumach-dbg - The GNU version of the Mach microkernel for debugging
 gnumach-dev - The GNU version of the Mach microkernel
 gnumach-udeb - The GNU version of the Mach microkernel (udeb)
Closes: 46709 226609
Changes: 
 gnumach (1:20050801-3) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Fix build failure with latest make 3.81 beta and the new tab vs. shell
     POSIX behaviour.
     - debian/patches/00_build_make_beta.patch: New file.
     Thanks to Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org>.
   * Added ChangeLog entries.
     - debian/patches/13_ide_dma.patch: Modify
     - debian/patches/14_alloc_params.patch: Likewise.
   * Fix io port access. (Closes: #46709)
     - debian/patches/40_user-tss.patch: New file.
     - debian/patches/41_io_unlock_ioremove.patch: Likewise.
     - debian/patches/42_disable_ioperm.disabled: Likewise.
     - debian/patches/43_debvice_port_fix.patch: Likewise.
     - debian/patches/44_more_ports.patch: Likewise.
     - debian/patches/45_io_per_task.patch: Likewise.
     - debian/patches/46_io_device.patch: Likewise.
     Thanks to Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>.
   * Fix memory limit, that was causing panics when having roughly more than
     768 MiB of physical memory. (Closes: #226609)
     - debian/patches/50_mem_limit.patch: New file.
     Thanks to Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>.
Files: 
 cb832ecde64825c19694af3aedca5449 856 base optional gnumach_20050801-3.dsc
 522ca102735a7384bcc7eb3eb673c911 410106 base optional gnumach_20050801-3.diff.gz
 bfbd5bf5a04c35a90169a1ac62819f21 966390 base optional gnumach_20050801-3_i386.deb
 520c2de5ad1708b636f90ccf647f3901 820402 debian-installer optional gnumach-udeb_20050801-3_i386.udeb
 e6e69d8477ff27c04eaadba586537df7 3117994 devel extra gnumach-dbg_20050801-3_i386.deb
 023431df46072a10ec3f86b3ac59f510 130864 devel optional gnumach-dev_20050801-3_i386.deb
Package-Type: udeb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDxZBVuW9ciZ2SjJsRAswPAJ9Dbmj/5uG9GXozLBy2uXcWL0H8pQCeIn5n
6xIX9OXh0icVEtAo4UffTVo=
=Ml3e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: