linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V40 03/29] security: Add a static lockdown policy LSM

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:   Wed, 4 Sep 2019 09:51:16 -0700
From:   Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V40 03/29] security: Add a static lockdown policy LSM

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 9:28 AM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Matthew Garrett <matthewgarrett@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > +static char *lockdown_reasons[LOCKDOWN_CONFIDENTIALITY_MAX+1] = {
>
> const char *const maybe?

Seems reasonable.

> > +static enum lockdown_reason lockdown_levels[] = {LOCKDOWN_NONE,
> > +                                              LOCKDOWN_INTEGRITY_MAX,
> > +                                              LOCKDOWN_CONFIDENTIALITY_MAX};
> > +
>
> const?
>
> Isn't this also a 1:1 mapping?

Sorry, a 1:1 mapping to what?

> > +static int lock_kernel_down(const char *where, enum lockdown_reason level)
>
> Is the last parameter the reason or the level?  You're mixing the terms.

Fair.