linux-kernel - Re: mprotect abuse in slim

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]

Date:	Thu, 11 Jan 2007 14:35:37 +0000
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, akpm@...l.org,
	kjhall@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	safford@...son.ibm.com
Subject: Re: mprotect abuse in slim

Hi!

> SLIM implements dynamic process labels, so when a process
> is demoted, we must be able to revoke write access to some
> resources to which it has previously valid handles.
> For example, if a shell reads an untrusted file, the
> shell is demoted, and write access to more trusted files
> revoked. Based on previous comments on lkml, we understand
> that this is not really possible in general, so SLIM only
> attempts to revoke access in certain simple cases.

Are you saying that SLIM is useless by design because interested
parties can work around it?
							Pavel
-- 
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.
-
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/