linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] ima: policy search speedup

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: <1355255320.2356.148.camel@falcor>
Date:	Tue, 11 Dec 2012 14:48:40 -0500
From:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
	"Kasatkin, Dmitry" <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ima: policy search speedup

On Tue, 2012-12-11 at 11:10 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Anyway, the whole "you can do it at file granularity" isn't the bulk
> of my argument (the "we already have the field that makes sense" is).
> But my point is that per-inode is not only the logically more
> straightforward place to do it, it's also the much more flexible place
> to do it. Because it *allows* for things like that.

Ok. To summarize, S_IMA indicates that there is a rule and that the iint
was allocated.  To differentiate between 'haven't looked/don't know' and
'definitely not', we need another bit.  For this, you're suggesting
using IS_PRIVATE()?  Hopefully, I misunderstood.

thanks,

Mimi



--
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/