Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:43:45 -0700
From: Kees Cook <>
To: Djalal Harouni <>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>, Andy Lutomirski <>, 
	Andrew Morton <>, 
	"" <>, 
	LSM List <>, 
	Linux API <>, Dongsu Park <>, 
	James Morris <>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <>, 
	Paul Moore <>, Tetsuo Handa <>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/3] LSM: Allow per LSM
 module per "struct task_struct" blob.

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Djalal Harouni <> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Casey Schaufler <> wrote:
>> I think that would be the prudent approach. There is still
>> the possibility that blob sharing (or full stacking, if you
>> prefer) won't be accepted any time soon.
> Ok Casey! I will wait for more feedback, and if other maintainers do
> not object, I will convert it back to rhashtables in next iterations
> making sure that it should be simple to convert later to a blob
> sharing mechanism.

Would it be possible just to add a single field to task_struct if this
LSM is built in? I feel like rhashtables is a huge overhead when a
single field is all that's needed.


Kees Cook
Pixel Security

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.