Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 11 May 2003 00:45:44 +0300 (IDT) | From | Yoav Weiss <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |