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: <CAHk-=wgS_XpzEL140ovgLwGv6yXvV7Pu9nKJbCuo5pnRfcEbvg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:21:36 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] proc: Point /proc/net at /proc/thread-self/net
 instead of /proc/self/net

On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 8:22 AM David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
>
> This was applied and then reverted by Linus (I can't find anything
> in the LKML archive) - see git show 155134fef - because of
> issues with apparmor and dhclient.

lkml archive link:

  https://lore.kernel.org/all/CADDKRnDD_W5yJLo2otWXH8oEgmGdMP0N_p7wenBQbh17xKGZJg@mail.gmail.com/

in case anybody cares.

I wonder if the fix is to replace the symlink with a hardcoded lookup
(ie basically make it *act* like a hardlink - we don't really support
hardlinked directories, but we could basically fake the lookup in
proc). Since the problem was AppArmor reacting to the name in the
symlink.

Al added the participants so that he can say "hell no".

Actually, it might be cleaner to make it act like a dynamic
mount-point instead - kind of "automount" style. Again, Al would be
the person who can say "sure, that makes sense" or "over my dead
body".

Al?

Or maybe that crazy AppArmor rule just doesn't exist any more. It's
been 8 years, after all.

                   Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ