linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH PLACEHOLDER 1/3] fs/exec: "always

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: <CABqD9hZFBY-S4ke1swtcYuuLKsgz73hx755niPirTivWBt9kuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:03:47 -0600
From:	Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, luto@....edu
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org,
	john.johansen@...onical.com, serge.hallyn@...onical.com,
	coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, pmoore@...hat.com, eparis@...hat.com,
	djm@...drot.org, segoon@...nwall.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	jmorris@...ei.org, scarybeasts@...il.com, avi@...hat.com,
	penberg@...helsinki.fi, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, mingo@...e.hu,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, khilman@...com, borislav.petkov@....com,
	amwang@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, gregkh@...e.de, dhowells@...hat.com,
	daniel.lezcano@...e.fr, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, olofj@...omium.org,
	mhalcrow@...gle.com, dlaor@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH PLACEHOLDER 1/3] fs/exec: "always_unprivileged" patch

On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> wrote:
>> This patch is a placeholder until Andy's (luto@....edu) patch arrives
>> implementing Linus's proposal for applying a "this is a process that has
>> *no* extra privileges at all, and can never get them".
>
> I think we can simplify and improve the naming/logic by just saying
> "can't change privileges".
>
> I'd argue that that even includes "can't drop them", just to make it
> really clear what the rules are.
>
> So the usage model would be to first simply set the privileges to
> whatever you want the sandbox to be, and then enter the restricted
> mode.

That sounds ideal to me.  This placeholder is certainly insufficient
then. I'll keep tweaking this patch then until its successor emerges.

Thanks!
will
--
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/