Re: [RFC v2 00/10] Landlock LSM: Unprivileged sandboxing
From: Pavel Machek <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-24 07:45:32
Also in:
lkml, netdev
Attachments
- signature.asc [application/pgp-signature] 181 bytes
From: Pavel Machek <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-24 07:45:32
Also in:
lkml, netdev
On Tue 2016-09-20 19:08:23, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
On 15/09/2016 11:19, Pavel Machek wrote:quoted
Hi!quoted
This series is a proof of concept to fill some missing part of seccomp as the ability to check syscall argument pointers or creating more dynamic security policies. The goal of this new stackable Linux Security Module (LSM) called Landlock is to allow any process, including unprivileged ones, to create powerful security sandboxes comparable to the Seatbelt/XNU Sandbox or the OpenBSD Pledge. This kind of sandbox help to mitigate the security impact of bugs or unexpected/malicious behaviors in userland applications. The first RFC [1] was focused on extending seccomp while staying at the syscall level. This brought a working PoC but with some (mitigated) ToCToU race conditions due to the seccomp ptrace hole (now fixed) and the non-atomic syscall argument evaluation (hence the LSM hooks).Long and nice description follows. Should it go to Documentation/ somewhere? Because some documentation would be useful...Right, but I was looking for feedback before investing in documentation. :)
Heh. And I was hoping to learn what I'm reviewing. Too bad :-). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html