linux-kernel - Re: fanotify - overall design before I start sending patches

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 4 Aug 2009 14:20:09 -0400
From:	"John Stoffel" <john@...ffel.org>
To:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc:	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...hos.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"malware-list@...sg.printk.net" <malware-list@...sg.printk.net>,
	"greg@...ah.com" <greg@...ah.com>,
	"jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>,
	Douglas Leeder <douglas.leeder@...hos.com>,
	"tytso@....edu" <tytso@....edu>,
	"arjan@...radead.org" <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"david@...g.hm" <david@...g.hm>,
	"jengelh@...ozas.de" <jengelh@...ozas.de>,
	"aviro@...hat.com" <aviro@...hat.com>,
	"mrkafk@...il.com" <mrkafk@...il.com>,
	"alexl@...hat.com" <alexl@...hat.com>,
	"jack@...e.cz" <jack@...e.cz>,
	"a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
	"alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	"mmorley@....in" <mmorley@....in>, "pavel@...e.cz" <pavel@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: fanotify - overall design before I start sending patches

>>>>> "Valdis" == Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu> writes:

Valdis> On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:27:48 EDT, Eric Paris said:
>> On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 17:09 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> > Would it make more sense to deny on timeouts and then evict? I am thinking it
>> > would be more secure with no significant drawbacks. Also for usages like HSM
>> > allowing it without data being in place might present wrong content to the
>> > user.
>> 
>> I'd be willing to go that route as long as noone else complains.

Valdis> Yes, in my world, "deny on timeout and evict" is the better
Valdis> design decision.  For an HSM, you'd rather have a
Valdis> quick-and-ugly death on a failed file open than an app
Valdis> accidentally reading the HSM's stub data thinking it's the
Valdis> original data.

Speaking as somone who is working slowly to deploy an HSM service, one
thing to note is that when you *do* see the stub file contents, you
know that your HSM is busted somehow. 

How will fanotify deal with this issue?  Sorry, I haven't paid enough
attention to this thread though I know I should since it's up my $WORK
alley.

John
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/