[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3ad4fb7f-99f3-fa71-fdb2-59db751c7e2b@namei.org>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 14:28:11 +1000 (AEST)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>
cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Linux Security Module list
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
SElinux list <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lockdown,selinux: avoid bogus SELinux lockdown
permission checks
On Wed, 26 May 2021, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> Thanks, Michael!
>
> James/Paul, is there anything blocking this patch from being merged?
> Especially the BPF case is causing real trouble for people and the
> only workaround is to broadly allow lockdown::confidentiality in the
> policy.
It would be good to see more signoffs/reviews, especially from Paul, but
he is busy with the io_uring stuff.
Let's see if anyone else can look at this in the next couple of days.
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists