[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8bd0f97a0910160843i1e95c543o842f91892f681214@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:43:20 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, graff.yang@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org,
gyang@...ckfin.uclinux.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH] mm/nommu.c: Fix improperly call of
security API in mmap
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:14, David Howells wrote:
> Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org> wrote:
>> I really don't like seeing such irrelevant (that's not the right word,
>> but I can't think what is) ifdefs creeping down into the security
>> layer as LSM authors are likely to mess them up in the future. I'd
>> probably rather see the addr_only argument changed into a flags field.
>> One for addr_only and one flag for not_addr. The nommu case could
>> just set the not_addr flag and it's obvious how the LSMs (or
>> capabilities if !CONFIG_SECURITY) should handle it, also works if some
>> other future need arises...
>
> A better way still, might be to deny the possibility of CONFIG_SECURITY if
> CONFIG_MMU=n. After all, security is sort of pointless when a userspace
> program can just edit the kernel at a whim.
except for MPU users, and arent some security restrictions useful when
talking about networked daemons ?
-mike
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists