Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 13:49:39 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,  Mickaël Salaün
 <mic@...ikod.net>,  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  Al Viro
 <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,  James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,  Jonathan
 Corbet <corbet@....net>,  Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,  Matthew
 Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,  Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
  Mickaël Salaün <mickael.salaun@....gouv.fr>,  Mimi
 Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,  Philippe Trébuchet
 <philippe.trebuchet@....gouv.fr>,  Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,  Thibaut
 Sautereau <thibaut.sautereau@....gouv.fr>,  Vincent Strubel
 <vincent.strubel@....gouv.fr>,  Yves-Alexis Perez
 <yves-alexis.perez@....gouv.fr>,  kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
  linux-api@...r.kernel.org,  linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,  Matthew Bobrowski
 <mbobrowski@...browski.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/5] fs: Add support for an O_MAYEXEC flag on sys_open()

* Steve Grubb:

> This flag that is being proposed means that you would have to patch all 
> interpreters to use it. If you are sure that upstreams will accept that, why 
> not just change the policy to interpreters shouldn't execute anything unless 
> the execute bit is set? That is simpler and doesn't need a kernel change. And 
> setting the execute bit is an auditable event.

I think we need something like O_MAYEXEC so that security policies can
be enforced and noexec mounts can be detected.  I don't think it's a
good idea to do this in userspace, especially the latter.

Thanks,
Florian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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