linux-kernel - Re: [TOMOYO 5/9] Memory and pathname management functions.

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, 21 Jun 2007 20:22:05 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Albert Cahalan <acahalan@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, takedakn@...data.co.jp,
	hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [TOMOYO 5/9] Memory and pathname management functions.

Hi!

> >> It's really not worth getting bothered by. Truth is, big
> >> giant
> >> pathnames break lots of stuff already, both kernel and
> >> userspace.
> >
> >> Just look in /proc for some nice juicy kernel breakage:
> >> cwd, exe, fd/*, maps, mounts, mountstats, root, smaps
> >
> >Well, but we should be fixing that, not adding more. And /proc is
> >info-only, while this is security related code.
> 
> Security tools read from /proc, so /proc is security-related.

If some tool relies on pathnames in /proc, that tool is broken... as
is /proc. We should be fixing that.

> The limit imposed by TOMOYO (or AppArmor) is fine,
> despite being security-related. It just needs to fail in

It is not "fine", but maybe it will not get us a bugtraq posting.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/