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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:53:46 +0000 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>, Alexander Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> Subject: Re: Upstream first policy On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 06:45:21PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 10:08:31AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > In other words: it really _does_ make more sense to say "this process has > > rights to overwrite the path '/etc/passwd'" than it does to try to label > > the file. The _fundamental_ rule is about the pathname. The labeling comes > > about BECAUSE YOU USED A HAMMER FOR A SCREW. > > > > I really don't understand why some people are unable to admit this fact. > > Because you don't have to use that pathname to modify the bits returned > by read() after open() on that pathname? > > I'm not fond of selinux, to put it mildly, but "pathname-based" stuff simply > doesn't match how the pathname resolution is defined on Unix... PS: at that point the *only* things I care about wrt "security" junk are * it shouldn't create new assertions to keep for VFS and fs code * it shouldn't break the normal Unix permissions for boxen that sanely have all that crap disabled * it shouldn't make one vomit just from RTFS * it shouldn't create obvious rootholes when enabled * it shouldn't add overhead from hell * it shouldn't try to hide the violations of the conditions above My opinion of the "security community" is worse than yours, BTW. You have decided that to let their stuff in; IMO it had been a mistake from the very beginning, but that's your tree. -- 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