On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 03:39:16PM -0500, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote: > >This is absolutely insane, no matter how much LSM snake oil you slatter on > >the whole thing. All of a sudden you are exposing a huge attack surface > >in the place where it would hurt most and as the consolation we are offered > >basically "Ted is willing to fix holes when they are found". > For the context of static image attacks, anything that's found > _needs_ to be fixed regardless, and unless you can find some way to > actually prevent attacks on mounted filesystems that doesn't involve > a complete re-write of the filesystem drivers, then there's not much > we can do about it. Yes, unprivileged mounts expose an attack > surface, but so does userspace access to the network stack, and so > do a lot of other features that are considered essential in a modern > general purpose operating system. "X is exposes an attack surface. Y exposes a diferent attack surface. Y is considered important. Therefore X is important enough to implement it" Right... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
