On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 11:31:00PM +, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:40:31PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > + if (req->data.nr != __NR_mount) {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "huh? trapped something besides mknod? %d\n",
> > req->data.nr);
>
> 'besides mount' ?
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 11:31:00PM +, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:40:31PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > + if (req->data.nr != __NR_mount) {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "huh? trapped something besides mknod? %d\n",
> > req->data.nr);
>
> 'besides mount' ?
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:40:31PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> The idea here is just to give a demonstration of how one could safely use
> the SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF feature to do mount policies. This particular
> policy is (as noted in the comment) not very interesting, but it serves to
>
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:40:31PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> The idea here is just to give a demonstration of how one could safely use
> the SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF feature to do mount policies. This particular
> policy is (as noted in the comment) not very interesting, but it serves to
>
The idea here is just to give a demonstration of how one could safely use
the SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF feature to do mount policies. This particular
policy is (as noted in the comment) not very interesting, but it serves to
illustrate how one might apply a policy dodging the various TOCTOU issues.
The idea here is just to give a demonstration of how one could safely use
the SECCOMP_RET_USER_NOTIF feature to do mount policies. This particular
policy is (as noted in the comment) not very interesting, but it serves to
illustrate how one might apply a policy dodging the various TOCTOU issues.
6 matches
Mail list logo