netdev - Re: New skb extension for use by LSMs (skb "security blob")?

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: <e2e22b41-2aa1-6a52-107d-e4efd9dcacf4@schaufler-ca.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:59:37 -0700
From:   Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     fw@...len.de, paul@...l-moore.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org,
        casey@...aufler-ca.com
Subject: Re: New skb extension for use by LSMs (skb "security blob")?

On 8/22/2019 2:18 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
> Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:35:01 -0700
>
>> If the secmark where replaced by a security blob, the u32 secmark field
>> in an sk_buff would be replaced by a void * security field.
> You can already use the secmark to hash to some kind of pointer or other
> object.

Would you really want that used in the most common configuration?
Sure, you *can* do that, but it would be insane to do so.