linux-kernel - Re: the easy way to sandbox?

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: <20120521194548.716cdf8e@mdontu-l>
Date:	Mon, 21 May 2012 19:45:48 +0300
From:	Mihai Donțu <mihai.dontu@...il.com>
To:	ivo.welch@...il.com
Cc:	ivo.welch@...erson.ucla.edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: the easy way to sandbox?

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:28:13 -0700 ivo welch wrote:
> Suggestion:  introduce a system call that eliminates access to all
> real file systems for the current process.  the only permissible
> interaction would be stdin, stdout, and stderr.
> 
> this would make it very simple to write a sandboxed safe fcgi script.
> the script could load all the dynamic libraries and data it wants, and
> then call this no-more-filesystem-access feature (preferably allowable
> without root privileges).  thereafter, even if a hacker takes control
> of the script, not much permanent damage can happen.
> 
> right now, it is much more complex to accomplish this---which is why
> sandboxing cgi scripts is not used too often.
> 

Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seccomp

-- 
Mihai Donțu
--
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/