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: <CACVxJT-R-+Nji5Cu_by1phJSSor_fT2_Pwtn24vpK49PZ_LHEg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:25:33 +0300
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	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>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5 v4] procfs: introduce hidepid=, hidenet=, gid= mount options

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> wrote:
>>     mount -t proc -o "pid_allow=exe,status,comm,oom_*" proc /proc
>
> Does this scheme make sense?  Should I rensend the patch with these
> architecture?
>
> pid_allow=, tid_allow=, attr_allow= and watch_gid= or smth like that.

Wildcards are scary, can we please not do them from the beginning.
--
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/