[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <511C3927.90603@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:08:55 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
CC: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Lock down MSR writing in secure boot
On 02/13/2013 05:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-13 at 16:44 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>
>> If you want that sort of granularity throw yourself on the SELinux
>> bandwagon. Fine grained capabilities are insane and unmanageable
>> and will only lead to tears. Security is despised because of the
>> notion that making systems impossible to use is a good thing.
>
> SELinux is completely unusable for this specific case.
>
Well, for at least things with device nodes (/dev/mem, /dev/msr and so
on) it should be possible, no? ioperm() and iopl() are another matter.
-hpa
--
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