From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@epoch.ncsc.mil>
Cc: casey@schaufler-ca.com, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v3)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 23:48:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080318064842.GA23167@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1205760399.22912.183.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 09:26:39AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > > The original promise was that LSM would allow kernels to be built that
> > > shed capabilities altogether,
> >
> > I don't remember that, but it's been a long time so it could be true.
>
> "One of the explicit requirements to get LSM into the kernel was to have
> the ability to make capabilities be a module. This allows the embedded
> people to completely remove capabilities, as they really want this. I
> don't think we can ignore this, no matter how much of a pain in the butt
> it is :)" - Greg KH
>
> Quoted from:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-security-module&m=99236500727804&w=2
>
> Ironically, since that time, capabilities have doubled in size and still
> can't be removed from the core kernel since LSM didn't push the state
> into the security blobs.
Maybe we need to seriously revisit this and perhaps rip capabilities
back out and put it always into the kernel if it's always a requirement.
Comments made 7 years ago might be totally wrong when we have now
learned how this all has worked out...
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-18 6:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-13 14:41 [PATCH] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v3) Serge E. Hallyn
2008-03-14 10:17 ` James Morris
2008-03-14 13:27 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-03-14 14:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2008-03-14 17:41 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-03-14 22:44 ` Casey Schaufler
2008-03-17 13:26 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-03-18 6:48 ` Greg KH [this message]
2008-03-17 14:08 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2008-03-17 16:16 ` Casey Schaufler
2008-03-17 16:48 ` Stephen Smalley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080318064842.GA23167@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@epoch.ncsc.mil \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox