[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200717192447.GO3673@sequoia>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:24:47 -0500
From: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Nayna <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Prakhar Srivastava <prsriva02@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Janne Karhunen <janne.karhunen@...il.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/12] ima: Have the LSM free its audit rule
On 2020-07-17 15:20:22, Nayna wrote:
>
> On 7/9/20 2:19 AM, Tyler Hicks wrote:
> > Ask the LSM to free its audit rule rather than directly calling kfree().
>
> Is it to be called audit rule or filter rule ? Likewise in subject line.
The security hooks call this "audit rule" but Mimi explained the
reasoning for IMA referring to this as an "audit filter" here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1593466203.5085.62.camel@linux.ibm.com/
I would be fine with her renaming/rewording this patch, accordingly, in
next-integrity-testing.
Tyler
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> - Nayna
Powered by blists - more mailing lists