Re: Low-level network hooks and rtnetlink

From: Stephen Smalley (sdsat_private)
Date: Fri Aug 10 2001 - 11:38:23 PDT

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: Possible system call interface for LSM"

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, James Morris wrote:
    
    > So, we start to end up with numerous hooks at the network, device and
    > hardware layers.  And this is just for ioctls.
    > 
    > Interfaces (and many other things) can also be configured via rtnetlink
    > messages, so we'd also need to add more hooks here to prevent users
    > bypassing the same policies.
    
    Ok, so your original suggestion sounds good - drop netdev_ops->ioctl
    and just use capable.  Of course, this leaves netdev_ops->unregister
    looking lonely.  We would still like it though to deallocate the netdev
    security blob.
    
    >   netdev_ops->setattr(dev);
    >   netdev_ops->getattr(dev);
    > 
    > The latter seemed to work ok technically for the prototype (except for
    > rtnetlink broadcasts), but was becoming ugly in terms of the number of
    > hooks in the kernel.
    
    This would have been nice, but I guess it isn't feasible for now.
    The setattr hook is the most important one, but also the most
    problematic.  
    
    --
    Stephen D. Smalley, NAI Labs
    ssmalleyat_private
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Fri Aug 10 2001 - 11:40:41 PDT