Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 08 Oct 2006 17:22:45 +0400 | From | Stas Sergeev <> | Subject | Re: [patch] honour MNT_NOEXEC for access() |
| |
Hello.
Jesper Juhl wrote: > As I see it, what we can resonably do with 'noexec' is > - make execve() fail. Done.
> - make access(), faccessat() return EACCESS for files stored on > 'noexec' filesystems. Done now in -mm.
> - make mmap(...PROT_EXEC...) fail for files stored on 'noexec' filesystems. Even for MAP_PRIVATE? But in what way the "noexec" is better than "chmod -x", which does _not_ make the PROT_EXEC to fail?
> Since we can't really prevent things like perl/php/bash/tcl/whatever > scripts from being executed/interpreted from there with this > mechanism, let's not worry about that. Leave that for things like > SELinux to deal with. Exactly, but isn't it the same with mmap? (MAP_PRIVATE at least) Since you can't prevent the prog to simply read() the data into an anonymously mapped space, you can just as well leave that to selinux too.
- 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/
| |