Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Sep 2004 12:11:46 +0100 | From | Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <> | Subject | Re: [patch] to add device+inode check to ipt_owner.c - HACKED UP |
| |
On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 08:49:28AM +0100, Gianni Tedesco wrote: > On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 11:39 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > ... did i sent a patch? > > > > did i send a patch?? i don't _think_ so *lol* :) > > heh :) > > IMO the number of constraints involed here make using this patch fairly > involved (for something security related at least) in that, as you said, > you have to: > > - be careful to use ACCEPT rules only > - be careful that you do: > 1. remove fw rules > 2. upgrade software > 3. replace rules > > plus the fastpath code looks very hairy with at least 3 locks taken and > O(num_tasks * max_fds) unpreemptable in softirq...
it's no worse than the present fireflier solution, which on a per-packet basis in userspace will go hunting through /proc looking for the socket _that_ way *gibber*.
fireflier reads /proc/NNNN/exe, then also hunts through the fds for that process on /proc looking for things beginning with "socket:".
[actually it used not to bother with the qualification for "socket:" resulting in a complete nightmare time for creating appropriate selinux policy]
l.
- 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/
| |