Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756380AbYHMRA7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:00:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752662AbYHMRAv (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:00:51 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:44424 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752867AbYHMRAu (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:00:50 -0400 Subject: Re: TALPA - a threat model? well sorta. From: Eric Paris To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, malware-list@lists.printk.net, andi@firstfloor.org, riel@redhat.com, greg@kroah.com, tytso@mit.edu, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, arjan@infradead.org, peterz@infradead.org, hch@infradead.org In-Reply-To: <20080813173722.13c9c306@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <1218645375.3540.71.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080813172437.3ed90b0d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <1218646065.3540.75.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080813173722.13c9c306@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:00:33 -0400 Message-Id: <1218646833.3540.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 (2.22.3.1-1.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1768 Lines: 44 On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 17:37 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:47:45 -0400 > Eric Paris wrote: > > > On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 17:24 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > So, what is it that anti-malware companies do? They scan files. That's > > > > it. > > > > > > Good so lets instead have a discussion about making the file event > > > notification more scalable. That is the same thing I want for content > > > indexing. It is the same thing you want for certain kinds of smart > > > archiving, for on-line asynchronous backup and other stuff. > > > > > > It ought to be a simple clean syscall interface. > > > > Are you willing to make it blocking? I'm not sure how to make what we > > have capable of assuring that the object you got a notification about is > > actually the object you are acting on. Thoughts on how to accomplish > > that? I'm here to code and I'm willing to throw all my work in the > > garbage if someone can show me how to actually do it better. > > I don't think you need to be blocking if you passed up a file handle ? Without blocking and waiting how do you deny access? Maybe I needed another thing they do. "They do file scanning and deny access to bad files." async scanning on close/write is great. but you need blocking/access control on open/read..... > fd = fileeventmumble(somestuff); > do_stuff > close(fd); > > [taking care not to end up recursing as a result] [you pointed out the whole point of process exclusions in the original work] -- 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/