[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Line.LNX.4.64.0704180935100.25495@d.namei>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 09:45:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: AppArmor FAQ
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> I'm not sure if AppArmor can be made good security for the general case,
> but it is a model that works in the limited http environment
> (eg .htaccess) and is something people can play with and hack on and may
> be possible to configure to be very secure.
Perhaps -- until your httpd is compromised via a buffer overflow or
simply misbehaves due to a software or configuration flaw, then the
assumptions being made about its use of pathnames and their security
properties are out the window.
Without security labeling of the objects being accessed, you can't protect
against software flaws, which has been a pretty fundamental and widely
understood requirement in general computing for at least a decade.
- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists