[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1580647.pAHyaBF6MS@sifl>
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 17:32:57 -0400
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: libseccomp-discuss@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: ANN: libseccomp
On Monday, April 09, 2012 12:16:30 PM Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
> > With the seccomp patches finally stabilizing a bit, it seems like now is a
> > good time to announce libseccomp: a library designed to make it easier to
> > create complex, architecture independent seccomp filters.
> >
> > * http://sourceforge.net/projects/libseccomp/
> > * git clone git://git.code.sf.net/p/libseccomp/libseccomp
>
> This looks really great; nice work!
Thanks.
> I see that the arch check happens during _gen_bpf_build_bpf(), which
> is excellent. Do you have any thoughts about including a call to
> prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1, 0, 0, 0) by default as well?
That is a good question, and I guess it comes down to another question of if
anyone would want to use seccomp without NO_NEW_PRIVS. If the answer is no
then I'm comfortable adding it into the seccomp_load() function; however, if
the answer is yes we might want to do something different.
I haven't given much thought to this yet, so if you or anyone else feels
strongly about the issue - either pro or con - I'd appreciate hearing the
argument.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
--
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