linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Security subsystem updates for 4.14

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: <1505165645.3470.1.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Sep 2017 17:34:05 -0400
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com>,
        5ac7eace2d00eab5ae0e9fdee63e38aee6001f7c@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Security subsystem updates for 4.14

On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 23:38 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 10:02:42AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > We need to differentiate between policies and x509 certificates.  In
> > the policy case, they need to be signed and appraised, while in the
> > x509 certificate case, the certificate itself is signed so the file
> > doesn't need to be signed or verified.
> 
> How about you take this sketch over - I don't know much about the
> integrity code, and it seems like you actually wrote
> kernel_read_file_from_path as well - so you're at least 3 times as
> qualified as I am in this area..

Sure, it's been on my to do list.

Mimi