Re: O_NOLINK for open()

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Brent Casavant
Date: Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 9:05 am

On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Gabor Gombas wrote:


Hmm.  This will work as long as the peer process is running setuid
to it's own unique user.  Excellent idea!  Since I need to make the
program setuid to avoid non-priveleged ptrace attacks, this is a
terrific solution.


I'm actually not so concerned about the client -- that code will be
trusted as well.  The problem I'm trying to solve is preventing any
non-priveleged code except the server and client from gaining access
to their shared memory area.  With the feedback I've received from
this thread I think a solid design is emerging, some of which will
need to be solved by system configuration by the sysadmin.

Thanks,
Brent

-- 
Brent Casavant                          All music is folk music.  I ain't
bcasavan@sgi.com                        never heard a horse sing a song.
Silicon Graphics, Inc.                    -- Louis Armstrong
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
O_NOLINK for open(), Brent Casavant, (Wed Sep 12, 1:37 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), H. Peter Anvin, (Wed Sep 12, 2:07 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Brent Casavant, (Wed Sep 12, 2:39 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Andreas Schwab, (Wed Sep 12, 2:42 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), H. Peter Anvin, (Wed Sep 12, 2:46 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Brent Casavant, (Wed Sep 12, 3:44 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Al Viro, (Wed Sep 12, 3:49 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Brent Casavant, (Wed Sep 12, 4:27 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Brent Casavant, (Wed Sep 12, 4:48 pm)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Gabor Gombas, (Thu Sep 13, 3:08 am)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Brent Casavant, (Thu Sep 13, 9:05 am)
Re: O_NOLINK for open(), Goswin von Brederlow, (Fri Sep 14, 9:37 am)