linux-kernel - Re: new ...at() flag: AT_NO

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1505075168.5111.45.camel@bitron.ch>
Date:   Sun, 10 Sep 2017 22:26:08 +0200
From:   Jürg Billeter <j@...ron.ch>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: new ...at() flag: AT_NO_JUMPS

Hi Al,

Might it make sense to specify these lookup restrictions when opening
the directory (O_ROOT?) instead of specifying it for each lookup with
AT_* (or supporting both)? This might make it more useful when passing
directory fds between processes that do not use seccomp (where
AT_BENEATH could be enforced).

For my sandboxing use case, I'd be happy with either solution, though.
Is there anything I can do to help move this forward?

Best regards,
Jürg