Hi!
(Please do not drop me from cc list when replying).
> > no, this won't help you much against local users, [...]
>
> Pavel Machek wrote:
> >Hmm, I guess I'd love "it is useless on multiuser boxes" to become
> >standard part of AA advertising.
>
> That's not quite what david@ said. As I understand it, AppArmor is not
> focused on preventing attacks by local users against other local users;
> that's not the main problem it is trying to solve. Rather, it's primary
> purpose is to deal with attacks by remote bad guys against your network
> servers. That is a laudable goal.
It is also not going to prevent local users attacking network servers.
Local users can ln arbitrary files, and then play tricks with network
servers.
> This means that AppArmor could still be useful on multiuser boxes,
> even if that utility is limited to defending (some) network daemons
> against remote attack (or, more precisely, reducing the damage done by
> a successful remote attack against a network daemon).
Yes, if there's significantly more remote bad guys than local bad
guys, and if remote bad guys can't just get some local user first, AA
still has some value.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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]
