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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:39:03 -0700
From:   Jerry Snitselaar <>
To:     James Morris <>
Cc:     Jarkko Sakkinen <>,,,, Peter Huewe <>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add linux-security-module mailing list to
 TPM drivers

On Thu Feb 21 19, James Morris wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> > being cc'd to linux-security-module? Looking back at
>> > recent patches, it looked like it was a general request.
>> > If it is, I'll be more likely to remember if
>> > brings it up. :)
>> I'm all open here. Not sure which practices apply to IMA. I kind of tend
>> to dilate to question does it make sense to CC to LSM for two reasons:
>> 1. I think the original reason was that tpmdd mailing list was small.
>> Now with the new linux-integrity mailing list up and running there is
>> more eyes looking at the code. And more importantly the people are
>> subscribed who use TPM for something, like IMA developers.
>> 2. I don't remember ever reading within the time that I've been
>> maintaining even a single comment from anyone that works with LSM's. The
>> value of CC'ing there is not very significant, which means that most of
>> the time the TPM traffic is just noise on that list.
>Sounds about right, there used to be more security folk on LSM and not as
>many on the TPM list, but the new integrity list works well for TPM now.
>James Morris

Okay. Ignore this patch then.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists