linux-kernel - Re: Upstream first policy

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: <4B9585BD.6070904@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:18:21 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
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 03/08/2010 01:08 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Things like "/etc/passwd" really are about the _pathname_, not the inode.
> It really is the _path_ that is special, because that is fundamentally the
> thing you trust.

On the other hand, '/etc/shadow' has the opposite constraint,
where the system will not trust most of the applications with
the data from that file.

Using label security to protect the contents makes sense there.

Your example appears to be about "can the application trust
the data?", while the label based security solves "can the
application be trusted with the data?"

These are two different things.
--
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/