Re: Stacking Openwall and SELinux?

From: Crispin Cowan (crispinat_private)
Date: Mon Apr 01 2002 - 15:52:37 PST

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "Re: Stacking Openwall and SELinux?"

    Seth Arnold wrote:
    
    >On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 04:01:38PM -0500, David Wheeler wrote:
    >
    >>I'm thinking about things like the Non-executable stack,
    >>temp directory limitations, etc.
    >>
    >I seem to recall that to implement non-exec stack in LSM would require
    >page-level access granularity, which was rejected as probably too
    >expensive (slow) for general use. However, I seem to recall that a chap
    >named Antony was working on providing statistics on just how much slower
    >the system would run with page-level granularity. I _think_ he provided
    >full LMBench numbers, but I'm not great at reading those numbers. (If he
    >wanted to post a 'make summary' output from lmbench, I might stand a
    >better chance of understanding the impact. :)
    >
    Antony floated a proposal to either add page-level hooks, or remove the 
    read/write syscall hooks. We (WireX & some others, IIRC) resisted the 
    "remove read/write hooks" proposal because real projects use them, and 
    work-arounds based on open hooks work only in limited circumstances.
    
    I am interested in the page-level hooks, and encouraged Antony to 
    continue. He implemented a page-level hook and posted LMBench data, but 
    only in "raw" form, which made it hard to interpret the real impact of 
    the hook. Requests to provide the full LMBench report went un-answered, 
    and the thread died out.
    
    If someone wants to contribute to LSM and doesn't have a project, it 
    would be REALLY helpful to go find the page-level hook that Antony 
    posted, and run it through LMBench and post the fully cooked results 
    here. This will allow us to decide whether page-level hooks have a real 
    performance impact. If the cost is small enough, I would support 
    including page level hooks for the following benefits:
    
        * Enables no-exec stack module. Linus doesn't have to like the module :)
        * Solves an open security problem with fully mediating mmap()
        * Funky research: might even enable fun research with VM paging
          algorithms
    
    But it all depends on the costs.  Need to measure carefully before this 
    can go forward.
    
    Crispin
    
    -- 
    Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com
    Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
    Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 Apr 01 2002 - 15:55:16 PST