linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kexec

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:   Thu, 2 May 2019 09:28:57 -0700
From:   Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        prakhar srivastava <prsriva02@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        casey@...aufler-ca.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec_buffer measure

On 5/2/2019 8:48 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> [Cc'ing Paul, John, Casey]
>
> On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 20:18 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>> [Cc'ing LSM mailing list]
>>
>> On Fri, 2019-04-19 at 17:30 -0700, prakhar srivastava wrote:
>>
>>> 2) Adding a LSM hook
>>> We are doing both the command line and kernel version measurement in IMA.
>>> Can you please elaborate on how this can be used outside of the scenario?
>>> That will help me come back with a better design and code. I am
>>> neutral about this.
>> As I said previously, initially you might want to only measure the
>> kexec boot command line, but will you ever want to verify or audit log
>> the boot command line hash?????Perhaps LSMs would be interested in the
>> boot command line. ??Should this be an LSM hook?
>   From an LSM perspective, is there any interest in the boot command line?

I can imagine an LSM that cares about the command line,
but I don't have interest in it for any work I have in progress.

> Mimi
>