On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:43:19AM +0200, Christian Stroetmann wrote: > On 23.06.2010 08:22, Kees Cook wrote: > >On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:03:08AM +0200, Christian Stroetmann wrote: > >>"You've already had those suggestions some days ago. Use a security > >>module, either by using something like SELinux (where you can do > >>this just fine as far as I can see including exceptions by label for > >>problem apps)", [Alan Cox, 2010-06-08], or integrate it into an > >>already existing solution eg. grsecurity (www.grsecurity.net). > >You appear to be quoting[1], but you left off a bit. To edit it a bit: > > > > "Use a security module, either by using something like SELinux (...), > > or write your own little security module that does it." > > > >I have done the latter. > > > >I don't need to integrate this into grsecurity because grsecurity already > >has these protections. It is Openwall and grsecurity that I'm using as the > >starting point for this attempt at upstreaming the protections. > > So, this sounds as if you are porting functionalities from > grsecurtiy into LSM. But [1]. > [1] http://www.grsecurity.net/lsm.php grsecurity is not in mainline. I want a few specific features but not the entire patchset, therefore, I must port functionalities from grsecurity into mainline. Since these features have been rejected from the core, they must go into an LSM. Luckily for me, there are hooks to handle the 3 protections I am currently interested in. :) If you can, please come to the Linux Security Summit[1], where things like the future of LSM will be discussed. -Kees [1] https://security.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/LinuxSecuritySummit2010/Schedule -- Kees Cook Ubuntu Security Team -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
