linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] v2 seccomp_filters: Enable ftrace-based system call filtering

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: <20110525190602.GC17864@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 25 May 2011 21:06:02 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Kees Cook <kees.cook@...onical.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] v2 seccomp_filters: Enable ftrace-based system call
 filtering


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> And per-system-call permissions are very dubious. What system calls 
> don't you want to succeed? That ioctl? You just made it impossible 
> to do a modern graphical application. Yet the kind of thing where 
> we would _want_ to help users is in making it easier to sandbox 
> something like the adobe flash player. But without accelerated 
> direct rendering, that's not going to fly, is it?

I was under the impression that Will had a very specific application 
in mind which actually works today and uses the inferior version of 
seccomp.

Will, mind filling us in on that?

I'd agree that adding any of this without a real serious app making 
real use of it would be pointless. I discussed this under the 
impression that the app existed :-)

I also got the very distinct impression from the various iterations 
that a real usecase existed behind it - all the fixes and 
considerations looked very realistic, not designed up for security's 
sake.

> So I'm sorry for throwing cold water on you guys, but the whole 
> "let's come up with a new security gadget" thing just makes me go 
> "oh no, not again".

Fair enough :-)

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/