From: Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Cc: casey@schaufler-ca.com,
lsm <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] security: split ptrace checking in proc
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 02:15:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080514091526.GB17453@sequoia.sous-sol.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1210687270.6206.129.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>
* Stephen Smalley (sds@tycho.nsa.gov) wrote:
> As above, it isn't quite a read vs. readwrite mode distinction (which is
> why I called it ptrace_may_readstate rather than just ptrace_may_read),
> and the advantage of implementing it via a new interface is that we only
> need to update the callers where we want to apply this different
> checking, leaving all other callers unmodified and unaffected. So while
> I could do it the way you describe, I'm not sure it would yield a better
> result. Maybe others can chime in with their opinions.
It is slightly ad-hoc. Is it just the audit messages that you described
that made you pick environ and fd, or was there more specific (threat
based) reasoning? Would /proc/pid/fd/ + genfs + e.g. anonfd be a little
wider than just readstate?
Perhaps you could update the comments in ptrace_may_inspect() to clarify.
thanks,
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-14 9:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-12 12:39 Stephen Smalley
2008-05-12 14:06 ` Casey Schaufler
2008-05-12 15:16 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-05-13 14:01 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-05-14 9:15 ` Chris Wright [this message]
2008-05-14 11:03 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-05-14 15:28 ` Chris Wright
2008-05-14 15:50 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-05-14 16:58 ` Chris Wright
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080514091526.GB17453@sequoia.sous-sol.org \
--to=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=eparis@parisplace.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®