linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] staging: ion: create one device entry per heap

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: <2a9246e0-eafa-7812-6cf4-2482ff1ed158@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Oct 2017 15:09:11 -0700
From:   Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
        Sandeep Patil <sspatil@...gle.com>,
        driverdevel <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Riley Andrews <riandrews@...roid.com>,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] staging: ion: create one device entry per heap

On 10/10/2017 02:11 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 05:10:37PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> On 10/09/2017 03:08 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 02:25:47PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
> 
>>>> Anyway, to move this forward I think we need to see a proof of concept
>>>> of using selinux to protect access to specific heaps.
> 
>>> Aren't Unix permissions enough with separate files or am I
>>> misunderstanding what you're looking to see a proof of concept for?
> 
>> The goal is to be able to restrict heap access to certain services
>> and selinux groups on Android so straight unix permissions aren't
>> sufficient.
> 
> Oh, there's Android users for this?  The users I was aware of were
> non-Android.  Though even so I'd have thought that given that SELinux is
> a superset of Unix file permissions it ought to be sufficient to be able
> to use them.  I'd been thinking people were suggesting SELinux as a
> replacement for file permissions, using the single file and the greater
> capabilities of SELinux.
> 
Unix file permissions are necessary but not sufficient, they
can be used separately. Mostly what I want to see before
merging this is an example that splitting the Ion heaps provides
more protection than just keeping /dev/ion.

Thanks,
Laura