On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:55:25 -0800 Kees Cook <kees@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 08:22:11PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
So, what's the state of this? Is the reduced "allowed to ptrace" check good enough for inclusion? What is needed for some form of this patch to be included? I'm happy to try new approaches if I can get some further input.[Adding Cc:lkml]btw I consider it an information leak that any user can see which
How about using a reduced check, as is done for fd and environ? This would allow root-running system monitors to still do their job. Effectively, this changes the test from "is ptracing" to just "can ptrace".
If this still isn't considered safe, I'll add the maps_protect file...
files/libraries any other user and root has mmap'd. (and with glibc's
stdio mmap feature that goes even beyond direct mmap to fopen()'d).
If root or some other user wants to watch
hillary-vs-obama-in-the-mud.avi, no other user has ANY business even
seeing that. So at minimum it's a privacy issue showing the filenames...
I just don't know what it will break - we're changing things so that user A
cannot monitor user B's memory maps. I feel that it's sure to break
various people's fancy custom system activity monitoring/logging setups,
and the sort of users who will be affected are, alas, the sort of people
who won't run a kernel with this change in it for another couple of years
yet.
Do we actually need to disable the whole interface? If all you're
concerned about is the pathname then perhaps the knob could cause that
pathname to be replaced with "<hidden>". That'll cause things to
break less seriously and still allows somewhat useful info to be gathered.