On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Alan Cox wrote:
> Ar Iau, 2006-07-27 am 19:49 +0200, ysgrifennodd Bodo Eggert:
> > Can shell scripts or binfmt_misc be exploited, too? Even if not, I'd
> > additionally force noexec, nosuid on proc and sysfs mounts.
>
> Why force them, this is just papering over imagined cracks and running
> from shadows. If users want to be paranoid about these file systems or
> their distro vendor is smart then the ability to set noexec/nosuid is
> already supported and even more can be done with selinux. In fact as its
> usually mounted in one place even AppArmor might be able to get it right
> 8)
s/force/default to/, since it's not OK to let the admin shoot his feet
unless he _explicitely_ demands to. What if the next crack allows evading
nosuid by using proc?
Being paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you ...
--
bus error. passengers dumped.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
