From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>
Cc: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH] proc: restrict access to /proc/interrupts
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:50:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EB83674.3040207@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACLa4puR6W+15KxpZtzAt6c2fXUhM8gkLY9Zn5RNE8qbNpO_xQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/07/2011 11:48 AM, Eric Paris wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:18 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> As to procfs, I see no real need of adding mode/group mount option for
>> global procfs files (/proc/interrupts, /proc/stat, etc.) - it can be
>> done by distro specific init scripts (chown+chmod). I don't mind
>> against such an option for the convenience, though.
>
> While possible, the chmod+chown 'solutions' just aren't as simple as
> you pretend. Every time one creates a chroot environment and mounts
> /proc it has be manually fixed there as well. Same thing with a
> container. Sure if /proc were something that was only ever mounted
> one time on a box it wouldn't be so bad, but that's not the case.....
Yes, for a filesystem that dynamically creates nodes, a static script
just doesn't work well. Control options do, like we have for devpts for
example.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-07 19:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-07 17:45 [PATCH] proc: restrict access to /proc/interrupts Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-11-07 18:06 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-11-07 19:01 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-11-07 19:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-11-07 19:29 ` [kernel-hardening] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-11-07 19:48 ` Eric Paris
2011-11-07 19:50 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2011-11-07 20:11 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-11-07 20:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-11-07 21:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-07 21:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-11-07 23:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-07 23:21 ` Alan Cox
2011-11-07 23:27 ` Greg KH
2011-11-07 23:40 ` Theodore Tso
2011-11-07 23:45 ` Alan Cox
2011-11-07 23:45 ` Greg KH
2011-11-08 20:07 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-11-09 16:14 ` Greg KH
2011-11-08 9:11 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-11-08 13:23 ` Alan Cox
2011-11-08 17:41 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-11-08 17:06 ` John Stoffel
2011-11-07 19:54 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-11-07 20:10 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-11-07 20:19 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4EB83674.3040207@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eparis@parisplace.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=segoon@openwall.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox