Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:52:00 -0500
From:      "Ugen Antsilevitch" <ugen@undp.org>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: execution access control <was Kernel Module@developers>
Message-ID:  <8b8f468b98ad.8b98ad8b8f46@undp.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> you name an object, but what object you act on.  The namespace 
> approachhas merit too, and is the basis for the DTE work done at 
> TIS a number of
> years ago.  You might be interested in taking a look at some of 
> the DTE
> papers published at USENIX...
 I have seen this work - this is almost exactly what i am hacking
around here with a couple of notable exceptions:
- Making everything non-system-specific (hence using names - the access
  control engine doesn't need to know what's outside).
- Allowing moves between "nodes" (things they call "domains", my
  control structure is pretty much a tree, described in XML :))))
  based not only on execution but on external rules.
- Above should link into firewall rules - that will make some neat 
  things possible (like having identical ssh shells restricted to
  different sets of command execution and file access based on
  where you come from:)))))
 
 On the partially related note, this whole thing is configured through
parsing pseudo-device. It takes some (rigorously defined and enforced) 
format definitions and structure pointers, then fills the structures
and hands them back to anything in the kernel. 
 This can be useful as a generic interface for anything that 
doesn't have one (instead of abusing ioctals, raw sockets and alike).
--Ugen


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8b8f468b98ad.8b98ad8b8f46>