Chris Wright wrote: >But I'm not sure we need any explicit support for across the board syscall >interpostion in the LSM interface. Because of the nature of the syscall >table, it is easy enough for an LSM to overwrite the syscall table with it's >own set of wrappers. Surprisingly, it is not as easy as you might think once you look more closely. I wrote about this very soon after the creation of this mailing list. For example, here are three problems: - Race conditions with adding/removing syscalls (especially on SMP machines). - What happens if more than one entity wants to interpose on syscalls? - Interposing on execve() [and one or two others] is tricky. This is not an exhaustive list. _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 17 2001 - 00:01:30 PDT