To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Path: not-for-mail
From: daw@cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Newsgroups: isaac.lists.linux-kernel
Subject: Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 03:20:10 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Message-ID: <efv99a$31o$3@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu>
References: <45150CD7.4010708@aknet.ru> <4522AEA1.5060304@aknet.ru> <1159900934.2891.548.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <4522B4F9.8000301@aknet.ru>
Reply-To: daw-usenet@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
NNTP-Posting-Host: taverner.cs.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 03:20:10 +0000 (UTC)
Originator: daw@taverner.cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 897
Lines: 14

Stas Sergeev  wrote:
>Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> then don't put noexec on /dev/shm.
>
>That's obviously possible, but I'd feel safer having
>"noexec" on *every* user-writable partition.

But why would you "feel" safer?  And why should the Linux kernel care
about how people "feel"?  The purpose of these mechanisms is not to make
people feel safer; it is to make them actually be safer.  If it isn't
actually making people safer -- if it is just to provide "warm fuzzies"
and a perception of safety -- then I don't see what business it has
going into the Linux kernel.  What threat, exactly, are you trying to
defend against?  What's your threat model?
-
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/