mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
Cc: Christian Ehrhardt <lk@c--e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:54:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1184864070.2694.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070719122424.GA5186@vino.hallyn.com>


> Right, the ability to boot with security.capability=disabpled (or
> whatever) and then load a custom module without having to use a whole
> new kernel is something I'm sure end-users want.
> 
> Especially since compiling a kernel which works with, say, a default
> fedora install, with lvm etc, is not imo for a novice (where novice
> != security novice).

the next step after this patch is to have an option to get rid of all
the function pointer chasing (which is expensive) for the case where you
know you only want one security module (which you then can turn on or
off)... that advantage is a performance gain for a lot of people.... but
if the person configuring the kernel selects this, it does mean there's
no way to load modules. I don't know what Fedora will do, but they might
select such an option. That's CHOICE... they chose a performance
improvement over enabling external kernel modules that they don't ship
anyway...

but is it really worth blocking such clear improvements in performance?

-- 
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org


  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-07-19 16:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-07-14 16:37 James Morris
2007-07-18 15:28 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-07-19  1:35 ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-19  2:42   ` James Morris
2007-07-19  3:35     ` david
2007-07-19  5:31     ` Greg KH
2007-07-19  7:39   ` Christian Ehrhardt
2007-07-19 12:24     ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-07-19 12:37       ` James Morris
2007-07-19 12:42         ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-07-19 13:00           ` James Morris
2007-07-19 13:37             ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-07-19 16:25               ` Adrian Bunk
2007-07-19 12:56         ` Scott Preece
2007-07-19 13:15           ` Alan Cox
2007-07-19 13:30             ` Scott Preece
2007-07-19 13:16           ` Adrian Bunk
2007-07-19 16:54       ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2007-07-19 17:19         ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-07-19 17:34           ` Chris Wright
2007-07-19 18:00           ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-07-19 18:10             ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-07-19 17:24         ` Christian Ehrhardt
2007-07-24  8:02 ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-24  8:53   ` Greg KH
2007-07-24  8:58     ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-24 18:25       ` Greg KH
     [not found] <OF54A17BCF.9A1D7004-ON8725731D.0044828E-8625731D.0046CAED@us.ibm.com>
2007-07-19 13:01 ` James Morris
2007-07-19 13:19   ` James Morris
2007-07-19 13:58     ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-07-19 16:01     ` Greg KH
     [not found] <Line.LNX.4.64.0706251953020.25122@localhost.localdomain.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2007-06-26  5:21 ` Marcus Meissner
     [not found] <20070617135239.GA17689@sergelap>
     [not found] ` <4676007F.7060503@kernel.org>
     [not found]   ` <20070618044017.GW3723@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
     [not found]     ` <20070620171037.GA28670@sergelap.ibm.com>
     [not found]       ` <20070620174613.GF3723@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
2007-06-21 16:00         ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-23  8:13           ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Andrew Morgan
2007-06-24 15:51             ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-24 16:18               ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch James Morris
2007-06-24 20:58                 ` [PATCH][RFC] security: Convert LSM into a static interface James Morris
2007-06-24 22:09                   ` Chris Wright
2007-06-25  4:33                     ` [PATCH try #2] " James Morris
2007-06-25 16:59                       ` Stephen Smalley
2007-06-25 23:56                         ` [PATCH try #3] " James Morris

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=1184864070.2694.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org \
    --to=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lk@c--e.de \
    --cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®