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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20190821.155013.1723892743521935274.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 15:50:13 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: paul@...l-moore.com Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: New skb extension for use by LSMs (skb "security blob")? From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:00:09 -0400 > I was just made aware of the skb extension work, and it looks very > appealing from a LSM perspective. As some of you probably remember, > we (the LSM folks) have wanted a proper security blob in the skb for > quite some time, but netdev has been resistant to this idea thus far. > > If I were to propose a patchset to add a SKB_EXT_SECURITY skb > extension (a single extension ID to be shared among the different > LSMs), would that be something that netdev would consider merging, or > is there still a philosophical objection to things like this? Unlike it's main intended user (MPTCP), it sounds like LSM's would use this in a way such that it would be enabled on most systems all the time. That really defeats the whole purpose of making it dynamic. :-/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists