linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the security tree with the vfs tree

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sun, 03 Jan 2016 20:37:20 -0500
From:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Petko Manolov <petkan@...-labs.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the security tree with the vfs tree

On Thu, 2015-12-31 at 15:24 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi James,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the security tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   3bc8f29b149e ("new helper: memdup_user_nul()")
> 
> from the vfs tree and commit:
> 
>   38d859f991f3 ("IMA: policy can now be updated multiple times")
> 
> from the security tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (hopefully, see below) and can carry the fix as necessary
> (no action is required).

Hi Stephen,

FYI, I pushed out Petko's patch to linux-integrity/next earlier today.
His patch moves taking the ima_write_mutex to after the the call to
copy_from_user(), as discussed.  This obviously won't fix the conflict
with Al's patch.  How do you want to handle it?  Do I need to do
anything?

Thanks!

Mimi

--
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/