linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] Provide in-kernel headers for making it easy to extend the kernel

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]

Date:   Tue, 12 Mar 2019 08:15:18 -0700
From:   Karim Yaghmour <karim.yaghmour@...rsys.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        atish patra <atishp04@...il.com>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        Manoj Rao <linux@...ojrajarao.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] Provide in-kernel headers for making it easy to
 extend the kernel

Hi Geert,

On 3/11/19 4:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
[ snip ]
> OK.
> 
> Now about the actual solution: what is your opinion on embedding e.g.
> a squashfs image in the kernel instead, which would be a more generic
> solution, not adding more ABI to /proc?

I'm not familiar enough with the intricacies of squashfs to have an 
educated opinion, but I hear that it's got its quirks (need for 
user-space tools, etc.) and possibly security issues. Also, I wonder 
whether it's a generalized solution that still kicks the ABI can down 
the road -- ultimately the kernel would still have a path/format/foo for 
making kheaders available in that squashfs image and that convention 
would become ABI. The only "benefit" being that said ABI wouldn't appear 
under /proc, and, tbh, I'm not sure that that's actually a benefit or is 
even idiomatic since kconfig.gz is already under /proc. To an extent, 
the precedent set by kconfig favors kheaders to also be available in the 
same location using a similar mechanism ... i.e. bonus points for 
consistency.

But that's my hand-wavy gut-reaction response to your question. I'm sure 
others on this thread have far more informed opinions about the 
specifics than I could have. My priority was to clarify the basis for 
the need being addressed.

Cheers,

-- 
Karim Yaghmour
CEO - Opersys inc. / www.opersys.com
http://twitter.com/karimyaghmour