On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:14:58AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > does apparmor at least (offer) to kill the app when this happens? > (rationale: the app is hijacked, better kill it before it goes to do > damage) We have considered offering a "kill the process on failure" configuration option; we certainly wouldn't want to force it on people, who might simply be stopping their application from doing something annoying. However, the code as currently posted, does not offer this feature. Thanks for the suggestion
Attachment:
pgpUubC6nEjvZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- References:
- [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Tony Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Stephen Smalley <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Stephen Smalley <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- Prev by Date: Re: Compiling C++ modules
- Next by Date: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release Digsig 1.5: kernel module for run-timeauthentication of binaries
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview
- Index(es):