linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] lockdown,selinux: avoid bogus SELinux lockdown permission checks

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: <CAHk-=wiUVqHN76YUwhkjZzwTdjMMJf_zN4+u7vEJjmEGh3recw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 5 Jun 2021 11:17:02 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
        SElinux list <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lockdown,selinux: avoid bogus SELinux lockdown
 permission checks

On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
>
> You have fallen into a common fallacy. The fact that the "code runs"
> does not assure that the "system works right". In the security world
> we face this all the time, often with performance expectations. In this
> case the BPF design has failed [..]

I think it's the lockdown patches that have failed. They did the wrong
thing, they didn't work,

The report in question is for a regression.

THERE ARE NO VALID ARGUMENTS FOR REGRESSIONS.

Honestly, security people need to understand that "not working" is not
a success case of security. It's a failure case.

Yes, "not working" may be secure. But security in that case is *pointless*.

              Linus