Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 07:52:34 +1100 (EST)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] security: Yama LSM

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Kees Cook wrote:

> Hi James,
> 
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:33:10AM +1100, James Morris wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_YAMA
> > > +	ns->ptrace_scope = parent_pid_ns->ptrace_scope;
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > 
> > I'd like to see this implemented as an LSM hook, something like 
> > security_ptrace_set_scope().
> 
> I must be dense, but I fail to understand the purpose of this. The "ptrace
> scope" implemented by Yama is a sysctl, not an system interface. I don't
> understand why (or where) other LSMs would want to catch changing this.
> Can you explain what you're looking for in more detail?
> 

We should not see YAMA-specific code in the core kernel.  However you do 
it, the above should happen in LSM.


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.