[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200507185046.GY11244@42.do-not-panic.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 18:50:46 +0000
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
dyoung@...hat.com, bhe@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
keescook@...omium.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cai@....pw,
rdunlap@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kernel: add panic_on_taint
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 02:06:31PM -0400, Rafael Aquini wrote:
> Another, perhaps less frequent, use for this option would be
> as a mean for assuring a security policy (in paranoid mode)
> case where no single taint is allowed for the running system.
If used for this purpose then we must add a new TAINT flag for
proc_taint() was used, otherwise we can cheat to show a taint
*did* happen, where in fact it never happened, some punk just
echo'd a value into the kernel's /proc/sys/kernel/tainted.
Forunately proc_taint() only allows to *increment* the taint, not
reduce.
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists