8 Oct 2011 00:36
PROT_EXEC PROT_WRITE
Javier Juan Martínez Cabezón <tazok.id0 <at> gmail.com>
2011-10-07 22:36:00 GMT
2011-10-07 22:36:00 GMT
Hi
I think it would be a good idea to split the MAP_EXEC request into two
requests, MAP_EXEC to EXEC only mappings and MAP_WRITE to write only
mappings, with this I think we could get W or X or mprotect pax facility
implemented in RC or ACL as requests fully integrated. In case both required
every one could grant both (java and a few ones more..., nothing important
though)
I think every PROT_EXEC rights should be granted only to every T_FILE
targets, and PROT_WRITE to T_NONE. I think changes wouldn't be so heavy,
don't you think?.
from mprotect.c:
MAP_EXEC||MAP_WRITE
#ifdef CONFIG_RSBAC
317 if ((prot & PROT_EXEC) && !(vma->vm_flags & PROT_EXEC))
{
318 rsbac_pr_debug(aef, "calling ADF\n");
319 if (vma->vm_file) {
320 rsbac_target = T_FILE;
321 rsbac_target_id.file.device =
vma->vm_file->f_dentry->d_inode->i_sb->s_dev;
322 rsbac_target_id.file.inode =
vma->vm_file->f_dentry->d_inode->i_ino;
323 rsbac_target_id.file.dentry_p =
vma->vm_file->f_dentry;
324 } else {
325 rsbac_target = T_NONE;
(Continue reading)
RSS Feed