Re: Syscall table AKA hijacking syscalls

[Libor Vanek]

> > I'm writing some project which needs to hijack some syscalls in VFS 
> > layer. AFAIK in 2.6 is this "not-wanted" solution (even that there are 
> > some very nasty ways of doing it - see 
> > http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/2002-12/msg00266.html )
> >
> > Also I've found out that Linus stated that intercepting syscalls is "bad 
> > thing" (load module a, load module b, unload module b => crash) but I 
> > think that there are some very good reasons (and ways) to do it (see 
> > http://syscalltrack.sourceforge.net ). My main reason to do it is that I 
> > want my GPLed module to be able to modify some VFS syscalls without 
> > patching and recompiling whole kernel and rebooting the machine.
> >    
>
> As part of the openxdsm-project we wrote an syscall-intercept module
> that "solves" the (load module a, load module b, unload module b =>
> crash) part by providing a common infrastructure for intercepting
> syscalls.
>  
The code looks very nice'n'simple but it won't run on 2.6 because 
mentioned hidden sys_call_table. But I can imagine that this with some 
small tweaks can be integrated into 2.6 to provide generall 
infrastructure for syscall hijacking when really needed.


--

Libor Vanek


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/