linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 1/6] IMA: Check IMA policy flag

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]

Message-ID: <6385347a-bc40-7717-f9ad-8ed7dd7fee51@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:29:49 -0800
From:   Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     eric.snowberg@...cle.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
        mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com, matthewgarrett@...gle.com,
        sashal@...nel.org, jamorris@...ux.microsoft.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/6] IMA: Check IMA policy flag

On 12/10/19 2:42 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:

> Patch descriptions aren't suppose to be written as pseudo code.  Start
> with the current status and problem description.
> 
> For example, "process_buffer_measurement() may be called prior to IMA being initialized, which would result in a kernel panic.  This patch ..."
> 
> Mimi

I'll update the patch description in this one and in the other patches 
per your comments.

Are you done reviewing all the patches in this set?

Other than the one code change per your comment on "[PATCH v10 5/6]" 
there are no other code changes I need to make?
Just wanted to confirm.

	[PATCH v10 5/6] IMA: Add support to limit measuring keys
=> With the additional "uid" support this isn't necessarily true any
more.

thanks,
  -lakshmi