Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 01:52:13 +0100 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: seccomp for 2.6.11-rc1-bk8 |
| |
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 07:43:26PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 23 Jan 2005, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > >I'm doing something that requires the maximum level of > >security ever, > > You're kidding, right ?
Why should I be kidding? The client code I'm doing, has to be at least as secure as ssh and the firewall code, what else has to be more secure than that? Nor ssh nor the firewall code depends on ptrace for their security. The nice thing is that I can embed all the security in the kernel with seccomp, and I'd be a fool not trying it to get it merged and to complicate my life with ptrace.
Once seccomp is in, I believe there's a chance that security people uses it for more than Cpushare while I don't think there's a chance you'll see security people using ptrace_syscall hardcoding the syscall numbers in every userland app out there that may have to parse untrusted data with potentially buggy bytecode (i.e. decompression bytecode etc..). - 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/
| |