Hello. Patrick McHardy wrote: > No news on that. I'm also a bit sceptical if adding all this complexity > and overhead would really be worth it (considering only netfilter) just > to use the owner match and UID/GID matching. It wouldn't even be > accurate because there is not 1:1 mapping of sockets and processes. Considering only LSM, socket_post_accept()/socket_post_recv_datagram() hooks are not complicated at all. A socket may be mapped to multiple processes, but at the moment of picking up (i.e. accept()/recvmsg()), I think it is accurate 1:1 mapping. I'm more interested in "Who picks this connection/datagram up?" than "Which socket enqueues this connection/datagram?" It may be indifferent for netfilter, but it is region of interest for me.
> I actually like Samir Bellabes' approach, which doesn't suffer from > these problems IIRC. Oh, I found him at http://nfws.inl.fr/en/?p=50 . (Sorry, I didn't know.) He is the person who was discussing with me a few days ago. > >>From memory, one approach under discussion was to add netfilter hooks to > > the transport layer, which could be invoked correctly by each type of > > protocol when the target process is selected. > > We can only invoke the hooks after the socket lookup, but we don't > know which process is going to call recvmsg() for that socket. Right. Thus, I'm proposing LSM hooks at accept()/recvmsg() time. Regards. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
