linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v2)

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: <Xine.LNX.4.64.0803140925410.30342@us.intercode.com.au>
Date:	Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:27:32 +1100 (EST)
From:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ch.ncsc.mil>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v2)

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:

> True, but while this change simplifies the code a bit, the semantics
> seem more muddled - devcg will be enforcing when CONFIG_CGROUP_DEV=y
> and:
> 
> 	SECURITY=n or
> 	rootplug is enabled
> 	capabilities is enabled
> 	smack is enabled
> 	selinux+capabilities is enabled

Well, this is how real systems are going to be deployed.

It becomes confusing, IMHO, if you have to change which secondary LSM you 
stack with SELinux to enable a cgroup feature.

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
--
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/