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 S1761005AbdEVTrM (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 22 May 2017 15:47:12 -0400
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([194.213.3.17]:27273 "EHLO
        lhrrgout.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1759125AbdEVTrL (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 22 May 2017 15:47:11 -0400
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 1/1] Sealable memory support
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
CC: <mhocko@kernel.org>, <dave.hansen@intel.com>, <labbott@redhat.com>,
        <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20170519103811.2183-1-igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
 <20170519103811.2183-2-igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
 <20170520085147.GA4619@kroah.com>
From: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <b3b4a71a-01a4-dad2-8df4-8b945c25be2f@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 22:45:26 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170520085147.GA4619@kroah.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.122.225.51]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0),
        refid=str=0001.0A020204.59234024.0029,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0,
        ip=0.0.0.0,
        so=2013-06-18 04:22:30,
        dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 12123e0e6a4ed2035a0c2447955c64bc
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 20/05/17 11:51, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 01:38:11PM +0300, Igor Stoppa wrote:
>> Dynamically allocated variables can be made read only,

[...]

> This is really nice, do you have a follow-on patch showing how any of
> the kernel can be changed to use this new subsystem?

Yes, actually I started from the need of turning into R/O some data
structures in both LSM Hooks and SE Linux.

> Without that, it
> might be hard to get this approved (we don't like adding new apis
> without users.)

Yes, I just wanted to give an early preview of the current
implementation, since it is significantly different from what I
initially proposed. So I was looking for early feedback.

Right now, I'm fixing it up and adding some more structured debugging.

Then I'll re-submit it together with the LSM Hooks example.

---
thanks, igor