Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Apr 2002 22:55:04 +0300 | From | Muli Ben-Yehuda <> | Subject | Re: Two fixes for 2.4.19-pre5-ac3 |
| |
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:41:14PM +0100, John Levon wrote: > On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:49:17PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > Removing it in the -ac tree is a good way to stimulate discussion > > OK > > > fixing the code that relies on it (except for the 99% of code relying on it > > which is cracker authored trojans) > > No doubt, but it's not much harder to look at nm vmlinux or System.map, > so I don't see the security angle... > > I'd be happy to bear the brunt of users moaning at me because they now > have to apply a kernel patch (and I have to maintain it ...), iff there > was some strongly technical reason the code has to change.
I'd like to second that. syscalltrack (http://syscalltrack.sf.net) hijacks syscall entries in the sys_call_table as well, because we want it to work as a module and not require patching the kernel. Our solution to the module unload race on syscall de-hijacking is simple, splitting the system call hijacking code into a single small module which once loaded cannot be unloaded.
So please keep the sys_call_table exported and marked as "ugh, not portable and racy, please dont hijack system calls unless you really have to" unless there's a strongly technical reason otherwise. Our users (all 7 of them) will appreciate it ;) -- The ill-formed Orange Fails to satisfy the eye: http://vipe.technion.ac.il/~mulix/ Segmentation fault. http://syscalltrack.sf.net/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |