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 10:31:21 +0200
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>, "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 10:28 AM EET, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> 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...

I mean if this RFC trend continues I'll just put auto-filter for this
thread to put straight to the bin.  There's enough non-RFC patch sets
to review.

BR, Jarkko

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ