|
Message-Id: <20120406125517.77133b4e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 12:55:17 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, rdunlap@...otime.net, mcgrathr@...omium.org, tglx@...utronix.de, luto@....edu, eparis@...hat.com, serge.hallyn@...onical.com, djm@...drot.org, scarybeasts@...il.com, indan@....nu, pmoore@...hat.com, corbet@....net, eric.dumazet@...il.com, markus@...omium.org, coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@...omium.org, jmorris@...ei.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, linux-man@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 01/15] Add PR_{GET,SET}_NO_NEW_PRIVS to prevent execve from granting privs On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:01:46 -0500 Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> wrote: > From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> > > With this set, a lot of dangerous operations (chroot, unshare, etc) > become a lot less dangerous because there is no possibility of > subverting privileged binaries. The changelog doesn't explain the semantics of the new syscall. There's a comment way-down-there which I guess suffices, if you hunt for it. And the changelog doesn't explain why this is being added. Presumably seccomp_filter wants/needs this feature but whowhatwherewhenwhy? Spell it all out, please. The new syscall mode will be documented in the prctl manpage. Please cc linux-man@...r.kernel.org and work with Michael on getting this done? > > ... >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.