[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F31249D.1040700@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:18:21 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
CC: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>,
Eric Northup <digitaleric@...gle.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Next gen kvm api
On 02/07/2012 02:51 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 02/07/2012 06:40 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 02/07/2012 02:28 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's a potential source of exploits
>>>> (from bugs in KVM or in hardware). I can see people wanting to be
>>>> selective with access because of that.
>>>
>>> As is true of the rest of the kernel.
>>>
>>> If you want finer grain access control, that's exactly why we have
>>> things like
>>> LSM and SELinux. You can add the appropriate LSM hooks into the KVM
>>> infrastructure and setup default SELinux policies appropriately.
>>
>> LSMs protect objects, not syscalls. There isn't an object to protect
>> here
>> (except the fake /dev/kvm object).
>
> A VM can be an object.
>
Not really, it's not accessible in a namespace. How would you label it?
Maybe we can reuse the process label/context (not sure what the right
term is for a process).
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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