[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080818165432.4E51C3F608D@pmx1.sophos.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:54:34 +0100
From: douglas.leeder@...hos.com
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
malware-list@...ts.printk.net
Subject: Re: [malware-list] scanner interface proposal was: [TALPA] Intro to a linux
interface for on access scanning
malware-list-bounces@...sg.printk.net wrote on 2008-08-18 17:15:00:
> > On async notification we fire a message to everything that registered
> > 'simultaneously.' On blocking we fire a message to everything in
> > priority order and block until we get a response. That response
should
> > be of the form ALLOW/DENY and should include "mark result"/"don't mark
> > result."
>
> No can do - you get stuck with recursive events with the virus checker
> trying to stop the indexer from indexing a worm.
And the opposite approach can't work because the AV scanner + the index
scanner
need the HSM to do its work before they can scan.
I guess the only way it could work is to have levels:
e.g.
HSM agent is Level 1
AV scanner is Level 2
Index scanner is Level 3
When you register at Level N, you are excluded from all blocking/scanning
at Levels >= N,
but your ops are still passed to Level < N.
An example is a little hard to craft because HSM and indexing catch
different operations. :-)
--
Douglas Leeder
Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon,
OX14 3YP, United Kingdom.
Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20.
--
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