linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9] Make use of permissions, returned by kobj

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: <20080307213220.GA12334@sergelap.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:32:20 -0600
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, menage@...gle.com, sukadev@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] Make use of permissions, returned by kobj_lookup

Quoting Casey Schaufler (casey@...aufler-ca.com):
> 
> --- Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 12:30 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Quoting Casey Schaufler (casey@...aufler-ca.com):
> > > > 
> > > > --- "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Until user namespaces are complete, selinux seems the only good
> > solution
> > > > > to offer isolation.
> > > > 
> > > > Smack does it better and cheaper. (Unless you define good==selinux)
> > > > (insert smiley)
> > > 
> > > Ah, thanks - I hadn't looked into it, but yes IIUC smack should
> > > definately work.  I'll have to give that a shot.
> > 
> > Not if you want to confine uid 0.  smack doesn't control capabilities,
> > even the ones used to override it.
> > 
> > So you'd have to at least configure your per-process bset and file caps
> > rather carefully.  And even then you have to watch out for things with
> > CAP_MAC* or CAP_SETPCAP.
> 
> Shrug. As if getting 800,000 lines of policy definition
> for a thousand applications completely correct is going to be easier.

Folks, as I get time I will try with both :)

I suspect the CAP_MAC_ADMIN will mean containers won't be able to do any
policy updates without an update to smack to do a CAP_NS_OVERRIDE type
of thing.  For SELinux I've got my hopes on the userspace policy daemon,
but first (my next step atm) I need to get the namespace thing going
(vserver1.root_t etc).

-serge
--
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/