From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: casey@schaufler-ca.com
Cc: paul@paul-moore.com, fw@strlen.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: New skb extension for use by LSMs (skb "security blob")?
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:17:16 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190822.141716.31265124292191524.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <00ab1a3e-fd57-fe42-04fa-d82c1585b360@schaufler-ca.com>
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:10:43 -0700
> Given that the original objection to using a skb extension for a
> security blob was that an extension is dynamic, and that the ubiquitous
> nature of LSM use makes that unreasonable, it would seem that supporting
> the security blob as a basic part if the skb would be the obvious and
> correct solution. If the normal case is that there is an LSM that would
> befit from the native (unextended) support of a blob, it would seem
> that that is the case that should be optimized.
The objection is the cost, either in terms of dynamic allocation or in
terms of fixed space allocated inside of the SKB.
If you are given a u32 (which you already have) it can be used as an
IDR-like space to look up pointers if necessary.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-22 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-21 22:00 New skb extension for use by LSMs (skb "security blob")? Paul Moore
2019-08-21 22:50 ` David Miller
2019-08-22 3:27 ` Paul Moore
2019-08-22 3:54 ` David Miller
2019-08-22 18:50 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-08-22 7:03 ` Florian Westphal
2019-08-22 16:32 ` Paul Moore
2019-08-22 20:10 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-08-22 20:15 ` Florian Westphal
2019-08-22 20:35 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-08-22 21:18 ` David Miller
2019-08-22 21:59 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-08-22 22:28 ` David Miller
2019-08-22 22:34 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-08-22 22:36 ` David Miller
2019-08-23 18:56 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-08-22 21:17 ` David Miller [this message]
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=20190822.141716.31265124292191524.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).