linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 0/3] SELinux support for anonymous inodes and UFFD

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: <6fcc0093-f154-493e-dc11-359b44ed57ce@schaufler-ca.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Apr 2020 10:12:47 -0700
From:   Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:     James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>
Cc:     Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
        SElinux list <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        Nick Kralevich <nnk@...gle.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com>,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/3] SELinux support for anonymous inodes and UFFD

On 4/22/2020 9:55 AM, James Morris wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020, Daniel Colascione wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 2:39 PM Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com> wrote:
>>> Changes from the fourth version of the patch:
>>
>> Is there anything else that needs to be done before merging this patch series?
> The vfs changes need review and signoff from the vfs folk, the SELinux 
> changes by either Paul or Stephen, and we also need signoff on the LSM 
> hooks from other major LSM authors (Casey and John, at a minimum).

I haven't had the opportunity to test this relative to Smack.
It's unclear whether the change would impact security modules that
don't provide hooks for it. I will bump my priority on this, but it's
still going to be a bit before I can get to it.