linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Introduce path iterator

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: <20250529201551.GN2023217@ZenIV>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 21:15:51 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
	andrii@...nel.org, eddyz87@...il.com, ast@...nel.org,
	daniel@...earbox.net, martin.lau@...ux.dev, brauner@...nel.org,
	kpsingh@...nel.org, mattbobrowski@...gle.com, amir73il@...il.com,
	repnop@...gle.com, jlayton@...nel.org, josef@...icpanda.com,
	mic@...ikod.net, gnoack@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Introduce path iterator

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 12:46:00PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:

> > Basically, you are creating a spot we will need to watch very carefully
> > from now on.  And the rationale appears to include "so that we could
> > expose that to random out-of-tree code that decided to call itself LSM",
> > so pardon me for being rather suspicious about the details.
> 
> No matter what we call them, these use cases exist, out-of-tree or
> in-tree, as BPF programs or kernel modules. We are learning from
> Landlock here, simply because it is probably the best way to achieve
> this.

If out-of-tree code breaks from something we do kernel-side, it's the
problem of that out-of-tree code.  You are asking for a considerable
buy-in, without even bothering to spell out what it is that we are
supposed to care about supporting.

If you want cooperation, explain what is needed, and do it first, so that
there's no goalpost shifting afterwards.