[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161222005725.GE1555@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:57:25 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] security: Add a new hook: inode_touch_atime
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 01:01:39AM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> SELinux should be interested. This is useful to create sandboxes so
> other LSM may be interested too
>
> I'm working on a new LSM and I would like this kind of hook to create a
> real read-only environment.
What the...? Have you noticed
if (!sb_start_write_trylock(inode->i_sb))
return;
if (__mnt_want_write(mnt) != 0)
goto skip_update;
in touch_atime()? Just mount them read-only in your sandbox (on either
level - both per-mountpoint and per-fs r/o will do) and be done
with that; why bother with LSM when regular tools would suffice?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists