Re: Authoritative Hooks

From: Casey Schaufler (caseyat_private)
Date: Fri Nov 09 2001 - 15:57:12 PST

  • Next message: Crispin Cowan: "Re: Authoritative Hooks"

    Stephen Smalley wrote:
    
    
    > One other clarifying point:  When I talk about universally granting
    > certain capabilities in order to bypass the built-in kernel logic and
    > to cause the corresponding LSM hook(s) to be authoritative, I only mean
    > that the security module's capable hook function always returns success to
    > the kernel for those capabilities.  Internally, the security module is
    > likely to have its own private capable function that it uses for
    > truly testing capabilities in the hook functions in order to provide the
    > default kernel logic, possibly in combination with other logic.
    
    The shear cleverness of the capability+restrictive scheme
    is I believe its undoing. You can use it to totally circumvent
    the security architecure of the system. While it is fun to
    play with this sort of thing, I would never suggest using it
    for production code.
    
    -- 
    
    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 : Fri Nov 09 2001 - 16:01:03 PST