linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM)

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: <1228497275.3041.2.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:14:35 -0500
From:	david safford <safford@...son.ibm.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Serge Hallyn <serue@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM)

On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 09:23 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting david safford (safford@...son.ibm.com):
> > On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 12:42 +1100, James Morris wrote:
> > > On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, david safford wrote:
> > >
> > > > These hooks were for alternate integrity modules, and since
> > > > no one else has defended them, we have to agree that they
> > > > should be replaced with direct calls.
> > >
> > > If you know of other modules which are planned to be ported to this
> > > framework, merged upstream and supported, then this would be similar to
> > > the situation when LSM was initially developed.
> > >
> > > You've previously mentioned some active projects here:
> > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/17/362
> > >
> > > Are there any definite commitments to push these upstream when the
> > > integrity framework is merged?
> > 
> > All of the projects listed in that posting were ones depending on
> > IMA, with no requirements for alternate modules. I do hope that there
> > will be other integrity modules in addition to the TPM oriented IMA, 
> > and I do know of several research projects in this space, but I don't 
> > know if/when any of these are planning on submission. If others are 
> > submitted, it would certainly be simple to add the hooks back in.
> 
> Too bad the main trusted knoppix site appears to be dead.  Was it
> actually making use of the templating api?
> 
> -serge

I believe they are using an older version of IMA without templating, 
but either way really shouldn't affect them.

dave
--
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/