Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:41:21 -0500 From: Todd Miller <Todd.Miller@sparta.com> To: Alex Barclay <alex@alexbarclay.net> Cc: trustedbsd-discuss@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Securing Mach IPC Message-ID: <425FB92C-B2E8-4945-9C6D-E953935DBAED@sparta.com> In-Reply-To: <1f81ef870603061110o62db95e1v58812bfdf0c1b3fb@mail.gmail.com> References: <1f81ef870603061110o62db95e1v58812bfdf0c1b3fb@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 6, 2006, at 2:10 PM, Alex Barclay wrote: > Understand that Sparta is working on securing mach IPC. But with the > volume of messages passed, are their plans to log/audit each mach IPC > message. I haven't been able to find out what if anything DTOS did in > that regard. Currently only the SEDarwin module secures Mach IPC. We do a security check for each message based on the sender and the destination port (themessages themselves are not labeled). We mediate send and receive as well as port right transfers. We haven't measured the performance hit yet but it doesn't seem too bad. The avc cache in Flask seems to work fairly well at reducing the access decision overhead. I develop (well, compile anyway) on a system with the SEDarwin module enabled and I don't really notice it... Now, if you tried to log all mach messages you would certainly take an additional performance hit. By default we only log denials. - todd
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?425FB92C-B2E8-4945-9C6D-E953935DBAED>