Re: The disappearing sys_call_table export.

[Yoav Weiss]

> Let's see you do sys_execve()...  sys_socketcall() and sys_ioctl() are
> fun, too.  (And, I worry about doubly-indirected pointers, for instance.)
> It's probably do-able, but you'd better stock up on the Advil in advance:
> we're in major headache country, folks.

I agree.  I could post my 2.0.x code for doing this, but it would be
counter-productive since security apps should use LSM for this very
reason.  I was merely suggesting a way for Masud to solve his specific
problem without rewriting his module.

sys_execve() and sys_socketcall() are actually not that hard.  sys_ioctl()
is next to impossible because no never know what the structs look like.
Luckily, most security apps don't require ioctl-screening.

Most security applications should use LSM but its not a good reason to
remove sys_call_table, since its still useful for many non-security
purposes.

	Yoav Weiss