Re: Security through Permissiveness: A Zen Riddle?

From: Casey Schaufler (caseyat_private)
Date: Wed Jul 18 2001 - 09:47:36 PDT

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: Changes to LSM phase 1 for audit."

    Tim Hollebeek wrote:
    
    > Many things that don't need root privs run below 1024 for a similar reason:
    > they are considered to be "machine wide" services, administered by root
    > instead of just some user.
    
    Back in the early days of Trusted Irix (1990?) I
    proposed that the policy for accessing low number
    ports ought to be considered a DAC policy, where
    ports through 1023 ought to be considered as owned
    by uid 0, mode 600, and all others mode 666.
    This has the advantage that, on a system without
    a Superuser, a system process can run without
    capabilities and still access the low ports.
    
    No one took it seriously then, either.
    
    -- 
    
    Casey Schaufler				Manager, Trust Technology, SGI
    caseyat_private				voice: 650.933.1634
    casey_pat_private			Pager: 888.220.0607
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Wed Jul 18 2001 - 09:49:26 PDT