[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87bqg8py9m.fsf@jbms.ath.cx>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 14:13:25 -0400
From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@....edu>
To: casey@...aufler-ca.com
Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@....edu> writes:
> [snip]
> Well, my point was exactly that App Armor doesn't (as far as I know) do
> anything to enforce the argv[0] convention, nor would it in general
> prevent a confined program from making a symlink or hard link. Even
> disregarding that, it seems very fragile in general to make an suid
> program (there would be no point in confining the execution of a
> non-suid program) perform essentially access control based on argv[0].
Note that by "confining the execution of a non-suid program", I mean
defining an App Armor profile that prevents the execution of a
particular non-suid program, unless of course the program file itself
contains secret information, which is irrelevant to this discussion.
--
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
-
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