lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: The disappearing sys_call_table export.
> Let's see you do sys_execve()...  sys_socketcall() and sys_ioctl() are
> fun, too. (And, I worry about doubly-indirected pointers, for instance.)
> It's probably do-able, but you'd better stock up on the Advil in advance:
> we're in major headache country, folks.

I agree. I could post my 2.0.x code for doing this, but it would be
counter-productive since security apps should use LSM for this very
reason. I was merely suggesting a way for Masud to solve his specific
problem without rewriting his module.

sys_execve() and sys_socketcall() are actually not that hard. sys_ioctl()
is next to impossible because no never know what the structs look like.
Luckily, most security apps don't require ioctl-screening.

Most security applications should use LSM but its not a good reason to
remove sys_call_table, since its still useful for many non-security
purposes.

Yoav Weiss

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.045 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site