Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] landlock network implementation cover letter

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

 





2/7/2022 4:35 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:

On 07/02/2022 14:18, Konstantin Meskhidze wrote:


2/1/2022 8:53 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:

On 24/01/2022 09:02, Konstantin Meskhidze wrote:
Hi, all!

This is a new bunch of RFC patches related to Landlock LSM network confinement.
Here are previous discussions:
1. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/20211210072123.386713-1-konstantin.meskhidze@xxxxxxxxxx/ 2. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/20211228115212.703084-1-konstantin.meskhidze@xxxxxxxxxx/

As in previous RFCs, 2 hooks are supported:
   - hook_socket_bind()
   - hook_socket_connect()

Selftest are provided in tools/testing/selftests/landlock/network_test.c;
Implementation was tested in QEMU invironment with 5.13 kernel version:

Again, you need to base your work on the latest kernel version.

   Is it because there are new Landlock features in a latest kernel
   version?
   I thought 5.13 kernel version and the latest one have the same
   Landlock functionality and there will not be rebasing problems in
   future. But anyway I will base the work on the latest kernel.
   Which kernel version do you work on now?


For now, the security/landlock/ files didn't changed yet, but that will come. All other kernel APIs (and semantic) may change over time (e.g. LSM API, network types…). I'm working on Linus's master branch (when it becomes stable enough) or the linux-rolling-stable branch (from the stable repository). When it will be ready for a merge, we need to base our work on linux-next.

  Ok. I got it. I will rebase to the latest version.
  Thanks.
.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Netfilter Development]     [Linux Kernel Networking Development]     [Netem]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Advanced Routing & Traffice Control]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux