lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Time to remove LSM (was Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks)
From
Date
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 17:19:04 PDT, Crispin Cowan said:
> Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> > In other words, it's quite possible to accidentally introduce a vulnerability
> > that wasn't exploitable before, by artificially restricting the privs in a way
> > the designer didn't expect. So this is really just handing the sysadmin
> > a loaded gun and waiting.
> >
> While that is true of the voluntary model of acquiring and dropping
> privs, it is not true of AppArmor containment, which will just not give
> you the priv if it is not in your policy.

The threat model is that you can take a buggy application, and constrain its
access to priv A in a way that causes a code failure that allows you to abuse
an unconstrained priv B.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-04-20 17:31    [W:0.322 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site