Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7 + tools] Checkpoint/restore mostly in the userspace

[Pavel Emelyanov <xemul-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>]

On 07/18/2011 11:04 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> (sorry, just realized postfix has been messing up my email, hope this
> comes through ok)
> 
> Thanks, Pavel.  I will take a look at this when I get a chance.  I'm
> a little worried about security implications - this approach should
> lend itself (especially with the binfmt handler) to clean handling
> of security issues, but given the issues we've had with /proc things
> that already exist, I'm worried about the dump files.  If you have
> any preemptive comments on that, please do share :)

As far as the security is concerned - yes, this is very tricky question.
Before we find out and fix all the possible security implications, I'd
suggest adding the
  if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
	return -EPERM
check into the execve handler. :)

And I understand your worry about the dump files in /proc. I do not like
this thing either and looking forward for your suggestions. I've asked this
question to Tejun, hopefully we'll work out the good solution.

> We did briefly try a binfmt handler at the very end of our foray into
> the ptrace checkpoint/restart approach, but your overall set here seems
> very nice.
> 
> thanks,
> -serge
> .
>