[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1810120252220.20563@namei.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 02:52:32 +1100 (AEDT)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>,
LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH security-next v5 00/30] LSM: Explict ordering
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:45 PM, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> >
> >> v5:
> >> - redesigned to use CONFIG_LSM= and lsm= for both ordering and enabling
> >> - dropped various Reviewed-bys due to rather large refactoring
> >
> > Patches 1-10 applied to
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/linux-security.git next-general
> > and next-testing.
>
> Very cool; thanks!
>
> As for the rest, I could post some examples of how the new CONFIG_LSM
> and "lsm=..." work (and how they mix with the "legacy" options). Would
> that be helpful?
Yes, thanks.
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists