From owner-freebsd-security  Fri Feb  9  5:36:54 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from point.osg.gov.bc.ca (point.osg.gov.bc.ca [142.32.102.44])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A20437B846
	for <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri,  9 Feb 2001 05:36:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by point.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) id FAA04527;
	Fri, 9 Feb 2001 05:35:59 -0800
Received: from passer.osg.gov.bc.ca(142.32.110.29)
 via SMTP by point.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpda04525; Fri Feb  9 05:35:57 2001
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
	by passer.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.11.2/8.9.1) id f19DZqO59870;
	Fri, 9 Feb 2001 05:35:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cwsys9.cwsent.com(10.2.2.1), claiming to be "cwsys.cwsent.com"
 via SMTP by passer9.cwsent.com, id smtpdZ59868; Fri Feb  9 05:35:04 2001
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
	by cwsys.cwsent.com (8.11.2/8.9.1) id f19DZ4684120;
	Fri, 9 Feb 2001 05:35:04 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <200102091335.f19DZ4684120@cwsys.cwsent.com>
Received: from localhost.cwsent.com(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "cwsys"
 via SMTP by localhost.cwsent.com, id smtpdV84116; Fri Feb  9 05:35:02 2001
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4
Reply-To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>
From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>
X-Sender: schubert
To: "David Beck" <dbeck@beckground.hu>
Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: security improvement ? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 08 Feb 2001 22:26:18 +0100."
             <002c01c09215$c7291220$5b3346c3@no> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 05:35:02 -0800
Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

In message <002c01c09215$c7291220$5b3346c3@no>, "David Beck" writes:
> Hi,
> 
> First of all, I would like to mention that this thing I describe here:
> - is not for production use (!!!)
> - have serious problems (look at the readme file)
> - mainly for generating discussion about the idea
> - might introduce security problems
> 
> The idea here is to introduce further limitations for the usage of syscalls.
> That is to say x process cannot call y syscall, and if he tries it log it
> (somewhere).
> This is like a user (root) configurable profile for a process for calling
> syscalls.
> 
> At the moment I wrote a simplified representation of the idea which can
> limit the usage of the syscalls in a specfied jail. This was faster to do
> and
> shows what I think.
> 
> http://dbeck.beckground.hu/download/scf-0.0.1.tar.gz
> 
> I'm sure that the way it is implemented is bad and instead of writing
> a kernel modul like this should make a patch for the kernel. I'm  working
> on the patch, but in the meantime I'm very much interested what the experts
> say about this.

You may also wish to take a look at Spy.

http://people.freebsd.org/~abial/spy-1.0.tgz


Regards,                         Phone:  (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert                        Fax:  (250)387-5766
Team Leader, Sun/Alpha Team   Internet:  Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca
Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA
Province of BC




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