linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v15 12/21] security: add security_bdev

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]

Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:28:38 +0200
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Paul Moore" <paul@...l-moore.com>, "Fan Wu"
 <wufan@...ux.microsoft.com>, <corbet@....net>, <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
 <jmorris@...ei.org>, <serge@...lyn.com>, <tytso@....edu>,
 <ebiggers@...nel.org>, <axboe@...nel.dk>, <agk@...hat.com>,
 <snitzer@...nel.org>, <eparis@...hat.com>
Cc: <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, <fsverity@...ts.linux.dev>,
 <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, <dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev>,
 <audit@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v15 12/21] security: add
 security_bdev_setintegrity() hook

On Wed Mar 20, 2024 at 1:00 AM EET, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2024 Fan Wu <wufan@...ux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > 
> > This patch introduces a new hook to save block device's integrity
> > data. For example, for dm-verity, LSMs can use this hook to save
> > the roothash signature of a dm-verity into the security blob,
> > and LSMs can make access decisions based on the data inside
> > the signature, like the signer certificate.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@...ux.microsoft.com>
> > 
> > --
> > v1-v14:
> >   + Not present
> > 
> > v15:
> >   + Introduced
> > 
> > ---
> >  include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h |  2 ++
> >  include/linux/security.h      | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >  security/security.c           | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 44 insertions(+)
>
> I'm not sure why you made this a separate patch, help?  If there is
> no significant reason why this is separate, please squash it together
> with patch 11/21.

Off-topic: it is weird to have *RFC* patch set at v15.

RFC by de-facto is something that can be safely ignored if you don't
have bandwidth. 15 versions of anything that can be safely ignored
is by definition spamming :-) I mean just conceptually.

So does the RFC still hold or what the heck is going on with this one?

Haven't followed for some time now...

BR, Jarkko