Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 07 Feb 2012 06:51:48 -0600 | From | Anthony Liguori <> | Subject | Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Next gen kvm api |
| |
On 02/07/2012 06:40 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 02/07/2012 02:28 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >>> It's a potential source of exploits >>> (from bugs in KVM or in hardware). I can see people wanting to be >>> selective with access because of that. >> >> As is true of the rest of the kernel. >> >> If you want finer grain access control, that's exactly why we have things like >> LSM and SELinux. You can add the appropriate LSM hooks into the KVM >> infrastructure and setup default SELinux policies appropriately. > > LSMs protect objects, not syscalls. There isn't an object to protect here > (except the fake /dev/kvm object).
A VM can be an object.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
> In theory, kvm is exactly the same as other syscalls, but in practice, it is > used by only very few user programs, so there may be many unexercised paths. >
| |