netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: Fix security_socket

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <201107262021.FCC34304.HMOOFQJVSFLFOt@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:21:23 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:	anton@...ba.org
Cc:	casey@...aufler-ca.com, mjt@....msk.ru, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Fix security_socket_sendmsg() bypass problem.

Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Not sure what happened to your email but the gains are evident at
> just 2 packets.

I know your benchmark result, but that result is based on calling
security_socket_sendmsg() only once.

What we worry is that overhead by security_socket_sendmsg() kills the
performance gain for batched case.

> I can help with testing - the commit included a microbenchmark for
> the purposes of analysing its performance.

Yes please. The patch in msg11510.html would want some more discussion, but
the patch in msg11504.html is ready to benchmark on your environment.

Does SELinux want to receive nosec flag at selinux_socket_sendmsg() because
calling security_socket_sendmsg() more than once is meaningless for SELinux?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html