linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/5 v4] procfs: introduce hidepid=, hidenet=, gid= mount options

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: <20110621153102.762557f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2011 15:31:02 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5 v4] procfs: introduce hidepid=, hidenet=, gid= mount
 options


Plese cc Alexey on procfs things.

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:51:35 +0400
Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> wrote:

> This patch series adds support of procfs mount options and adds
> mount options to restrict /proc/<pid>/ directories to owners and
> /proc/<pid>/net/* to root.  Additional group may be defined via
> gid=, and this group will be privileged to study others /proc/<pid>/
> and networking information.
> 
> Similar features are implemented for old kernels in -ow patches (for
> Linux 2.2 and 2.4) and for Linux 2.6 in -grsecurity, but both of them
> are implemented as configure options, not cofigurable in runtime, with
> changes of gid of /proc/<pid>/, and without backward-compatible
> /proc/<pid>/net/* handling.

This all seems highly specific to one particular set of requirements. 
We have one set of access permission rules and then dive into procfs
and hard-wire those rules into the implementation?  What happens if
someone else has a similar but slightly different set of requirements? 
More kernel patches?

IOW is there some more general way of doing all this?  <handwaving>Like
better permissions/chmod support in procfs and an inherited-across-fork
per-process procfs permissions mask.</handwaving>


Does all this code support `mount -o remount' as expected?
--
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/