linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] LSM: Make security_hook

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: <d25e2fd3-da11-4ec0-8edc-f1327c04fa6e@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 May 2017 22:50:09 +0300
From:   Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com>
To:     Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
CC:     <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Greg KH" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        "Stephen Smalley" <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LSM: Make security_hook_heads a local variable.

On 22/05/17 18:09, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 5/22/2017 7:03 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

[...]

>> But even with those we can still chain
>> them together with a list with external linkage.
> 
> I gave up that approach in 2012. Too many unnecessary calls to
> null functions, and massive function vectors with a tiny number
> of non-null entries. From a data structure standpoint, it was
> just wrong. The list scheme is exactly right for the task at
> hand.

I understand this as a green light, for me to continue with the plan of
using LSM Hooks as example for making dynamically allocated data become
read-only, using also Tetsuo's patch (thanks, btw).

Is that correct?

---
thanks, igor