[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: secure computing for 2.6.7
On Sun, 1 Aug 2004, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 01:01:10PM +0100, wrote:
> > Hi Andrea,
> >
> > Do you have plans to generalize seccomp into somelike like a "syscall
> > firewall"? This _would_ be useful to many apps, and provide good security


> Seems like a few people is interested in what you suggest above. it'd be
> very trivial to add a seccomp-mode = 2 that adds more syscalls like the
> socket syscalls like accept/sendfile/send/recv and also the open syscall
> (which means you want to use chroot still). In the code you can see I
> wrote it so that more modes can be added freely. I mean it has some
> flexibility already. vsftpd could enable the seccomp mode 2 on itself
> after it has initialized.

Using the above approach, we (the app writers) would never agree on the
syscall lists required for different seccomp modes ;-)

How hard would it be to have a per-task bitmap of syscalls allowed? This
way, a task could restrict to the exact subset of syscalls required for
maximum security.
The bitmap would
- Be allocated on demand (for no overhead in the common case)
- Deny all syscalls not covered by the supplied bitmap, to cater for
syscall table expansion
- Be inherited across fork and (probably) shared across clone

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.124 / U:0.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site