Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 Jul 2010 11:39:01 +1000 (EST) | From | James Morris <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] Yama: add PTRACE exception tracking |
| |
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Err, no. This is just a very clear sign that your ptrace restrictions > were completely wrong to start with and break applications left, right > and center. Just get rid of it instead of letting workarounds for your > bad design creep into the core kernel and applications.
Indeed, I wasn't aware that there were further aspects to this -- I thought it was a relatively simple case of restricting a problematic OS feature for heavily locked down systems.
This is getting more complicated, with fine-grained security policy now being introduced, also with the need to modify applications.
There are several existing LSMs with the ability to control ptrace, but as part of a system-wide, coherent, analyzable policy -- often in support of specific security models for which there is concrete user demand and benefit.
If people won't use any of SELinux, Smack, Tomoyo or AppArmor, then I don't think providing an ad-hoc assortment of workarounds with no overall design is going to help them either.
If LSMs need to call into common code in Yama, or even do lightweight chaining, that's one thing, but for Yama to evolve into yet another standalone security scheme, is something entirely different.
- James -- James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
| |