Re: capable hook call in must_not_trace_exec

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Mon Sep 24 2001 - 10:23:32 PDT

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "Re: capable hook call in must_not_trace_exec"

    On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 09:06:56AM -0500, Smalley, Stephen wrote:
    > 
    > Is the call to security_ops->capable in fs/exec.c:must_not_trace_exec
    > still necessary?  It appears that 2.4.10 changed the ptrace logic to
    > check CAP_SYS_PTRACE for the parent process during ptrace_attach, setting
    > the PT_PTRACE_CAP flag if it is granted, and then merely checks this flag
    > in must_not_trace_exec.  Since our capable hook is called by capable
    > during the ptrace_attach, there doesn't appear to be a need to retain
    > the capable hook call in must_not_trace_exec.  (Previously,
    > must_not_trace_exec
    > was performing a cap_raised test on the parent, so we had replaced that test
    > with a call to our capable hook on the parent, but this change appears
    > to eliminate the need for this).
    
    In looking at the code I think I agree with you.
    
    Shall I remove the hook?
    
    thanks,
    
    greg k-h
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Mon Sep 24 2001 - 10:29:17 PDT