Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] io_uring: add restrictions to support untrusted applications and guests

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:47:36AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 8/25/20 9:20 AM, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > Hi Jens,
> > this is a gentle ping.
> > 
> > I'll respin, using memdup_user() for restriction registration.
> > I'd like to get some feedback to see if I should change anything else.
> > 
> > Do you think it's in good shape?
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, this is fine. But I want to make sure that Kees
> is happy with it, as he's the one that's been making noise on this front.

Oop! Sorry, I didn't realize this was blocked on me. Once I saw how
orthogonal io_uring was to "regular" process trees, I figured this
series didn't need seccomp input. (I mean, I am still concerned about
attack surface reduction, but that seems like a hard problem given
io_uring's design -- it is, however, totally covered by the LSMs, so I'm
satisfied from that perspective.)

I'll go review... thanks for the poke. :)

-- 
Kees Cook



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux