linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] How to handle the rules engine for cgroups

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: <20080711095501.cefff6df.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:55:01 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Libcg Devel Mailing List <libcg-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <pzijlstr@...hat.com>,
	Kazunaga Ikeno <k-ikeno@...jp.nec.com>,
	Morton Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...hat.com>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] How to handle the rules engine for cgroups

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:40:35 -0400
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:48:52AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 02:23:52 -0700
> > "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > I don't see the rule-based approach being all that useful for our needs.
> > 
> > Agreed, there really is no need for a rule-based approach in kernel space.
> > 
> > There are basically three different cases:
> > 
> > 1) daemons get started up in their own process groups, this can
> >    be handled by the initscripts
> > 
> > 2) user sessions (ssh, etc) start in their own process groups,
> >    this can be handled by PAM
> > 
> > 3) users fork processes that should go into special process
> >    groups - this could be handled by having a small ruleset
> >    in userspace handle things, right before calling exec(),
> 
> That means application launcher (ex, shell) is aware of the right cgroup
> targeted application should go in and then move forked pid to right
> cgroup and call exec? Or you had something else in mind?
>  
> >    it can even be hidden from the application by hooking into
> >    the exec() call
> > 
> 
> This means hooking into libc. So libc will parse rules file, determine
> the right cgroup, place application there and then call exec?
> 

Hmm, as I wrote, the rule that the child inherits its own parent't is very
strong rule. (Most of case can be handle by this.) So, what I think of is

1. support a new command (in libcg.)
  - /bin/change_group_exec ..... read to /etc/cgroup/config and move cgroup
                                 and call exec.
2. and libc function
  - if necessary.

1. is enough because admin/user can write a wrapper script for their
applications if "child inherits parent's" isn't suitable.

no ?

Thanks,
-Kame











--
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/