linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface

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]

Message-ID: <20070719133727.GC32313@sergelap.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:37:27 -0500
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface

Quoting James Morris (jmorris@...ei.org):
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> 
> > > It's already pretty clear.
> > 
> > I doubt anyone not on lkml or linux-security-module has heard of this.
> > 
> > So we'll see.
> > 
> > (I was, obviously, talking about end-users)
> 
> If distributions are shipping binary modules and other out of tree code to 
> their users, then they should bear responsibility for supporting and 
> maintaining the infrastructure required for it, and not expect upstream 
> maintainers to do it for them.
> 
> Additionally, if they want to expose their users to risks arising from 
> broken and unecessary infrastructure, then they should bear the cost and 
> responsibility of doing that and not expect others to do so as well.
> 
> I don't see how this is even slightly difficult to understand.

I'm not talking about distros - I don't see how this is even slightly
difficult to understand  :)

The situation I have in mind is someone who decideds to use, say, SLIM,
but wants to otherwise use the distro kernel.

James, relax, I'm done arguing against your patch, I just think
end-users/customers might complain.

-serge
-
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/