From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752993AbdGMWd4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:33:56 -0400
Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:58210 "EHLO
        relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752846AbdGMWdz (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:33:55 -0400
X-Originating-IP: 72.66.113.207
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 00/11] S.A.R.A. a new stacked LSM
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Micka=c3=abl_Sala=c3=bcn?= <mic@digikod.net>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
        Brad Spengler <spender@grsecurity.net>,
        PaX Team <pageexec@freemail.hu>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>
References: <1497286620-15027-1-git-send-email-s.mesoraca16@gmail.com>
 <53a2d710-b0f0-cdf9-e7ad-cd8d03fc835a@digikod.net>
 <CAJHCu1+=uYQ-N7CH4KfmTHrN2hJjwzN0tgg4sWHU0LjVr+uGGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <c19917fa-f62c-b7e0-8cbd-f10a96f686ba@digikod.net>
 <CAJHCu1K1Hg5M2HhJxN_aj2P_S8Pez9+8KL=wHKBgAN0jN1+mLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <69ff2195-d0e1-8a0f-b80e-5d8d55947907@nmatt.com>
 <1499801476.6034.265.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <988555a2-bed9-234c-843c-0bb68dc60d3f@nmatt.com>
 <1499959179.4220.45.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20170713195106.GD4895@mail.hallyn.com>
From: Matt Brown <matt@nmatt.com>
Message-ID: <89afb299-6830-cc77-50ea-7edb17f3ca60@nmatt.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:33:47 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170713195106.GD4895@mail.hallyn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 7/13/17 3:51 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Mimi Zohar (zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
>> On Thu, 2017-07-13 at 08:39 -0400, Matt Brown wrote:
>> The question is really from a security perspective which is better?
>>  Obviously, as v2 of the patch set changed from using pathnames to
>> inodes, it's pretty clear that I think inodes would be better.  Kees,
>> Serge, Casey any comments?
> 
> Yes, inode seems clearly better.  Paths are too easily worked around.
> 

Sounds good. Do we think a rb_tree would be better than a list to store
the inodes in?

Matt