On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 00:10:07 +0900 Tetsuo Handa <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> 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. Seccomp is tiny. They may not know how to use it but the job of the kernel is to provide generic interfaces. Seccomp seems to do that just fine for simple stuff. Alan
