Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261171AbVAWAwQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:52:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261172AbVAWAwQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:52:16 -0500 Received: from ppp-217-133-42-200.cust-adsl.tiscali.it ([217.133.42.200]:3077 "EHLO dualathlon.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261171AbVAWAwN (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:52:13 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 01:52:13 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Rik van Riel Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Pavel Machek , Ingo Molnar , Chris Wright , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: seccomp for 2.6.11-rc1-bk8 Message-ID: <20050123005213.GK7587@dualathlon.random> References: <20050121093902.O469@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20050121105001.A24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20050121195522.GA14982@elte.hu> <20050121203425.GB11112@dualathlon.random> <20050122103242.GC9357@elf.ucw.cz> <20050122172542.GF7587@dualathlon.random> <20050122194242.GB21719@elf.ucw.cz> <20050122233418.GH7587@dualathlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-AA-GPG-Key: 1024D/68B9CB43 13D9 8355 295F 4823 7C49 C012 DFA1 686E 68B9 CB43 X-AA-PGP-Key: 1024R/CB4660B9 CC A0 71 81 F4 A0 63 AC C0 4B 81 1D 8C 15 C8 E5 X-Cpushare-GPG-Key: 1024D/4D11C21C 5F99 3C8B 5142 EB62 26C3 2325 8989 B72A 4D11 C21C X-Cpushare-SSL-SHA1-Cert: 3812 CD76 E482 94AF 020C 0FFA E1FF 559D 9B4F A59B X-Cpushare-SSL-MD5-Cert: EDA5 F2DA 1D32 7560 5E07 6C91 BFFC B885 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1207 Lines: 25 On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 07:43:26PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 23 Jan 2005, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > >I'm doing something that requires the maximum level of > >security ever, > > You're kidding, right ? Why should I be kidding? The client code I'm doing, has to be at least as secure as ssh and the firewall code, what else has to be more secure than that? Nor ssh nor the firewall code depends on ptrace for their security. The nice thing is that I can embed all the security in the kernel with seccomp, and I'd be a fool not trying it to get it merged and to complicate my life with ptrace. Once seccomp is in, I believe there's a chance that security people uses it for more than Cpushare while I don't think there's a chance you'll see security people using ptrace_syscall hardcoding the syscall numbers in every userland app out there that may have to parse untrusted data with potentially buggy bytecode (i.e. decompression bytecode etc..). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/