linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs: export anon_inode_make_secure

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: <c0cc4faf-42eb-4c2f-8d25-a2441a36c41b@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 16:21:15 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
 Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
 Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com>, david@...hat.com,
 akpm@...ux-foundation.org, paul@...l-moore.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
 willy@...radead.org, pbonzini@...hat.com, tabba@...gle.com,
 afranji@...gle.com, ackerleytng@...gle.com, jack@...e.cz,
 cgzones@...glemail.com, ira.weiny@...el.com, roypat@...zon.co.uk,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: export anon_inode_make_secure_inode() and fix
 secretmem LSM bypass

On 6/23/25 16:01, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 07:00:39AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 12:16:27PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
>> > I'm more than happy to switch a bunch of our exports so that we only
>> > allow them for specific modules. But for that we also need
>> > EXPOR_SYMBOL_FOR_MODULES() so we can switch our non-gpl versions.
>> 
>> Huh?  Any export for a specific in-tree module (or set thereof) is
>> by definition internals and an _GPL export if perfectly fine and
>> expected.

Peterz tells me EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL_FOR_MODULES() is not limited to in-tree
modules, so external module with GPL and matching name can import.

But if we're targetting in-tree stuff like kvm, we don't need to provide a
non-GPL variant I think?

> .. the only thing we should do is to drop the pointless _GPL in the
> name entirely.

I'd agree if it was indeed limited to in-tree modules.