linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] kernel tinification: optionally compile out splice family of syscalls (splice, vmsplice, tee and sendfile)

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: <87y4qz82yc.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
Date:	Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:01:15 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	josh@...htriplett.org, rdunlap@...radead.org, pieter@...sman.nl,
	alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	ast@...mgrid.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, beber@...eeweb.net,
	catalina.mocanu@...il.com, dborkman@...hat.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, fabf@...net.be,
	fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
	hughd@...gle.com, iulia.manda21@...il.com, JBeulich@...e.com,
	bfields@...ldses.org, jlayton@...chiereds.net,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
	mcgrof@...e.com, mattst88@...il.com, mgorman@...e.de,
	mst@...hat.com, miklos@...redi.hu, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	oleg@...hat.com, Paul.Durrant@...rix.com,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, pefoley2@...oley.com, tgraf@...g.ch,
	therbert@...gle.com, trond.myklebust@...marydata.com,
	willemb@...gle.com, xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	zhenglong.cai@...c.com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] kernel tinification: optionally compile out splice family of syscalls (splice, vmsplice, tee and sendfile)

David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:

> From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:16:44 -0600
>
>> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:
>> 
>>> From: josh@...htriplett.org
>>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 10:53:10 -0800
>>>
>>>> It's not a "slippery slope"; it's been our standard practice for ages.
>>>
>>> We've never put an entire class of generic system calls behind
>>> a config option.
>> 
>> CONFIG_SYSVIPC has been in the kernel as long as I can remember.
>> 
>> I seem to remember a plan to remove that code once userspace had
>> finished migrating to more unixy interfaces to ipc.  But in 20 years
>> that migration does does not seem to have finished, or even look
>> like it ever will.
>> 
>> But if we started a slippery slope it was long long ago.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> Would be amusing if these tiny systems have it enabled.

It would.

In practice when I was playing in that space I had a hard time
justifying CONFIG_NET and CONFIG_INET.  Despite writing a network
bootloader to use with kexec.

Eric
--
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/