linux-kernel - Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 00/11] S.A.R.A. a new stacked LSM

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:   Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:33:47 -0400
From:   Matt Brown <matt@...tt.com>
To:     "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com>,
        Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>,
        PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 00/11] S.A.R.A. a new stacked LSM

On 7/13/17 3:51 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Mimi Zohar (zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com):
>> On Thu, 2017-07-13 at 08:39 -0400, Matt Brown wrote:
>> The question is really from a security perspective which is better?
>>  Obviously, as v2 of the patch set changed from using pathnames to
>> inodes, it's pretty clear that I think inodes would be better.  Kees,
>> Serge, Casey any comments?
> 
> Yes, inode seems clearly better.  Paths are too easily worked around.
> 

Sounds good. Do we think a rb_tree would be better than a list to store
the inodes in?

Matt