Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 12:22:12 -0800 From: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net> To: Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Disabling ptrace Message-ID: <29058.1419970932@chaos> In-Reply-To: <3368390.qHnOScdmzK@shawnwebb-laptop> References: <20141230111941.GE42409@kib.kiev.ua> <20141230140709.GA96469@stack.nl> <3368390.qHnOScdmzK@shawnwebb-laptop>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm curious what the use case was that brought this up. And why the requester > thinks it's actually useful. Being able to disable ptrace is useful - provided it cannot be bypassed. In Junos we leveraged the signed binary implementation (based on NetBSD's verified exec) to tag processes for which ptrace should fail. The signed binary stuff also supposed to prevent games with LD_PRELOAD - assuming we didn't provide and sign the lib in question. When we re-implemented veriexec as a MAC module, the above was left out, in anticipation of using a separate module (though perhaps still leveraging veriexec to set the labels).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?29058.1419970932>