![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Ulrich Drepper wrote: >On 10/3/06, David Wagner <daw@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote: >> Are you familiar with the mmap(PROT_EXEC, MAP_ANONYMOUS) loophole? > >Another person who doesn't know about SELinux. Read > >http://people.redhat.com/drepper/selinux-mem.html You're right, I didn't know about that one. Thanks for the education and for taking the time to respond. I wonder whether it is feasible to run with allow_exec{heap,mem,mod,stack} all set to false, on a real system. Is there any example of a fully worked out SELinux policy that has these set to false? FC5 has allow_execheap set to false and all others set to true in its default SELinux policy, so it looks like the mmap(PROT_EXEC, MAP_ANONYMOUS) loophole remains open in FC5 by default. My concern would be that setting all of the exec-related booleans to false might break so much code that setting them all to false wouldn't be feasible in practice. If so, the theoretical possibility to close the mmap(PROT_EXEC, MAP_ANONYMOUS) loophole may be one of these things that is possible in theory but not in practice. - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-10-04 06:25 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||