linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][Patch 1/6] integrity: new hooks

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, 08 Mar 2007 15:38:50 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, safford@...son.ibm.com,
	serue@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, kjhall@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	zohar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch 1/6] integrity: new hooks

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 12:46:47 CST, "Serge E. Hallyn" said:
> I think it should be done as both.  The part which measures the
> integrity of files should be an integrity subsystem.  The part which
> uses those results to either allow/refuse actions or take some other
> action (i.e. shut down the system) should be an lsm.

That would be good - the allow/deny parts, being security, can use the
existing LSM hooks, and the integrity part can use the LIM hooks.

Umm... wait a minute - *what* Linux Integrity Module hooks? :)

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped