linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/19] CacheFiles: Permit a process's create SID to be overridden

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1796.1163614917@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:21:57 +0000
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Karl MacMillan <kmacmillan@...talrootkit.com>
Cc:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	trond.myklebust@....uio.no, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aviro@...hat.com, steved@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/19] CacheFiles: Permit a process's create SID to be overridden 

Karl MacMillan <kmacmillan@...talrootkit.com> wrote:

> > and the race in which the rules might change is still a
> > possibility I have to deal with.
> 
> I don't think this is a race, it is revocation of access. If you check the
> access at every operation and correctly deal with access failures, then this
> shouldn't be a problem. Yes it is a pain, but that is how SELinux is supposed
> to work.

Yes, but what is the correct method of dealing with a failure?  All I can think
of is to SIGKILL the process.

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