On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > that depend on the internal structure of the kernel's task struct. (Are their
> > such (she asks naively)? It's just such a tiny bit of code....:-)
> >
> > Soooo...ok, um, now tear me to shreds, er, I mean comments?
>
> I actually implemented it for some experimental stuff I was doing (resource
> tracking). Certainly doesnt bother me. It should be 'obvious' code.
The problem with the "luid" concept, when applied to C2 audit trails, is
that you have to be careful it can't be subverted.
The ways of subverting these are the usual kernel subversion entry points
:) i.e. insmod, /dev/mem, iopl(), etc. Luckily we've got the capability
bounding set so luid can be useful.
Cheers
Chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 21:00:25 EST