Alan Cox wrote: > > I saw several companies who ship their embedded devices with > > single-function LSM modules (e.g. restrict only mount operation and > > ptrace operation). What is unfortunate is that their LSM modules had > > never been proposed for upstream, and thus bugs remained unnoticed. > > So which of them cannot be done with seccomp ? We have a small tight > interface for simple things like restricting a few calls.
They restricted based on hard-coded rules. seccomp is too much for their cases. > > > via lack of ability to use LKM-based LSM modules). My customers cannot > > afford > > enabling SELinux, but my customers cannot rebuild their kernels because > > rebuilding makes it even more difficult to get help from support centers. > > And "I've loaded this third party module" doesn't ? Situation is far much better than "I've recompiled this vmlinux". ;-)