linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <568cba54-dd42-45e9-be0f-53569811f2e9@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 16:28:00 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
 akpm@...ux-foundation.org, brauner@...nel.org, paul@...l-moore.com,
 rppt@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Cc: seanjc@...gle.com, willy@...radead.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
 tabba@...gle.com, afranji@...gle.com, ackerleytng@...gle.com, jack@...e.cz,
 hch@...radead.org, 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
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] fs: export anon_inode_make_secure_inode() and fix
 secretmem LSM bypass

On 6/23/25 16:13, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 6/23/25 16:08, Shivank Garg wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> In general, LGTM, but I think the actual fix should be separated from exporting it for guest_memfd purposes?
>>> 
>>> Also makes backporting easier, when EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL_FOR_MODULES does not exist yet ...
>>> 
>> I agree. I did not think about backporting conflicts when sending the patch.
>> 
>> Christian, I can send it as 2 separate patches to make it easier?
> 
> The proper way is to send the fix without the export, and then add the
> export only when adding its user.

Note: AFAIU either way the new user would be depending on a patch in a vfs
tree (maybe scheduled for an 6.16 rc and not the next merge window?) if
that's an issue for the development.

>> Thanks,
>> Shivank
>