[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACdnJus9AhAAYs-R94BH7HDuuQfXjgdhdqUR6Pvk9mxbuPx1=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:35:36 -0700
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>
To: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>, cmr <cmr@...ormatik.wtf>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V32 01/27] Add the ability to lock down access to the
running kernel image
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 1:40 AM Andrew Donnellan
<andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com> wrote:
> I'm thinking about whether we should lock down the powerpc xmon debug
> monitor - intuitively, I think the answer is yes if for no other reason
> than Least Astonishment, when lockdown is enabled you probably don't
> expect xmon to keep letting you access kernel memory.
The original patchset contained a sysrq hotkey to allow physically
present users to disable lockdown, so I'm not super concerned about
this case - I could definitely be convinced otherwise, though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists