Re: [patch] to add device+inode check to ipt_owner.c - HACKED UP

From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
Date: Fri Sep 10 2004 - 06:01:58 EST


On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 08:49:28AM +0100, Gianni Tedesco wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 11:39 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > ... did i sent a patch?
> >
> > did i send a patch?? i don't _think_ so *lol* :)
>
> heh :)
>
> IMO the number of constraints involed here make using this patch fairly
> involved (for something security related at least) in that, as you said,
> you have to:
>
> - be careful to use ACCEPT rules only
> - be careful that you do:
> 1. remove fw rules
> 2. upgrade software
> 3. replace rules
>
> plus the fastpath code looks very hairy with at least 3 locks taken and
> O(num_tasks * max_fds) unpreemptable in softirq...

it's no worse than the present fireflier solution, which on a
per-packet basis in userspace will go hunting through /proc
looking for the socket _that_ way *gibber*.

fireflier reads /proc/NNNN/exe, then also hunts through the fds for
that process on /proc looking for things beginning with "socket:".

[actually it used not to bother with the qualification for "socket:"
resulting in a complete nightmare time for creating appropriate
selinux policy]

l.

-
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/