lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] Security: Implement disablenetwork semantics. (v4)
    Quoting Michael Stone (michael@laptop.org):
    > Serge Hallyn wrote:
    > >Michael, I'm sorry, I should go back and search the thread for the
    > >answer, but don't have time right now - do you really need
    > >disablenetwork to be available to unprivileged users?
    >
    > Rainbow can only drop the networking privileges when we know at app launch time
    > (e.g. based on a manifest or from the human operator) that privileges can be
    > dropped. Unfortunately, most of the really interesting uses of disablenetwork
    > happen *after* rainbow has dropped privilege and handed control the app.
    > Therefore, having an API which can be used by at least some low-privilege
    > processes is important to me.
    >
    > >is it ok to require CAP_SETPCAP (same thing required for dropping privs from
    > >bounding set)?
    >
    > Let me try to restate your idea:
    >
    > We can make disablenetwork safer by permitting its use only where explicitly
    > permitted by some previously privileged ancestor. The securebits facility
    > described in
    >
    > http://lwn.net/Articles/280279/
    >
    > may be a good framework in which to implement this control.
    >
    > Did I understand correctly? If so, then yes, this approach seems like it would
    > work for me.

    That is a little more than I was saying this time though I think I
    suggested it earlier.

    But really I don't think anyone would care to separate a system into
    some processes allowed to do unprivileged disablenetwork and other
    processes not allowed to, so a (root-owned mode 644) sysctl seems just
    as useful.

    > Regards, and thanks very much for your help,
    >
    > Michael
    > --
    > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
    > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-01-12 16:55    [W:3.873 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site