linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][Patch 5/5]integrity: IMA as an integrity service provider

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:	Fri, 30 May 2008 09:06:09 -0400
From:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, safford@...son.ibm.com,
	serue@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, sailer@...son.ibm.com, zohar@...ibm.com,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	CaseySchaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch 5/5]integrity: IMA as an integrity service provider


On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 20:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:

> > > - ima_fixup_inodes looks like it will race and crash against a
> > >   well-timed unmount.  I expect you will need to bump s_count before
> > >   dropping sb_lock.  See writeback_inodes() for an example.
> > 
> > ima_fixup_inodes() is called once at initialization.  
> 
> What is "initialisation"?  During initcalls?  Are there even any files
> in cache at that time?  I bet we can arrange for the answer to become
> "no".

Yes, during the initcalls.  Is this possible even when using
late_initcall().  IMA is dependent on the TPM being available,
if it is being used.

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/