netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: Added 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CAKgT0Udf_tMn-oeE_Oqu3P+ZqD0Pg65EGoSOoF0qfHeHynU5jw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Apr 2023 08:04:04 -0700
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:     Denis Arefev <arefev@...mel.ru>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, trufanov@...mel.ru, vfh@...mel.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Added security socket

On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 1:00 AM Denis Arefev <arefev@...mel.ru> wrote:
>
> Hi Alexander. I understand your concern.
> That's right kernel_connect is in kernel space,
> but kernel_connect is used in RPC requests (/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c),
> and the RPC protocol is used by the NFS server.
> Note kernel_sendmsg is already protected.

Can you add a write-up about the need for this in the patch
description? Your patch description described what you are doing but
not the why. My main concern is that your patch may end up causing
issues that could later be reverted by someone if they don't
understand the motivation behind why you are making this change.

Calling out things like the fact that you are trying to add security
to RPC sockets would be useful and would make it easier for patch
review as people more familiar with the security code could also tell
you if this is the correct approach to this or not.

Thanks,

- Alex