[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171020155748.kzrvg6565oxh6gmb@linux-rasp2>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 23:57:48 +0800
From: jlee@...e.com
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, matthew.garrett@...ula.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jforbes@...hat.com, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Gary Lin <GLin@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/27] bpf: Restrict kernel image access functions when
the kernel is locked down
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 09:08:48AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Hi Joey,
>
> Should I just lock down sys_bpf() entirely for now? We can always free it up
> somewhat later.
>
> David
OK~~ Please just remove my patch until we find out a way to
verify bpf code or protect sensitive data in memory.
I think that we don't need to lock down sys_bpf() now because
we didn't lock down other interfaces for reading arbitrary
address like /dev/mem and /dev/kmem.
Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee
Powered by blists - more mailing lists