From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754148AbdK1UMY (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:12:24 -0500 Received: from mail-it0-f66.google.com ([209.85.214.66]:38713 "EHLO mail-it0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752729AbdK1UMX (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:12:23 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZVGbOYHcwe4ciUzN0EknOf8dCNuCVWljundwylFw1J21QIOwfunJjH9/A8I7TIxx5yg+IkTf4km26+gx27c2o= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1511803118-2552-1-git-send-email-tixxdz@gmail.com> <1511803118-2552-6-git-send-email-tixxdz@gmail.com> <1100603534.56586.1511871419952@ichabod.co-bxl> <20171128193243.4fymnjk7fplqw62x@thunk.org> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:12:21 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: bzyJ5AtePUAJe7ckgzjdwkwa5y4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v5 next 5/5] net: modules: use request_module_cap() to load 'netdev-%s' modules To: Kees Cook Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , Djalal Harouni , Jonathan Corbet , James Morris , LSM List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , Geo Kozey Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > > Linus, are you okay with this series if the global sysctl gets dropped? So really, it's not the "global sysctl" as much as the "global request_module()" that annoys me. I'll happily take the request_module_cap() part and the thing that makes networking use that. But the flag that we have to default to off because it breaks every single box otherwise? No. It doesn't matter if it's one single global or just a "global behavior for request_module() for this process" at that point, it's still a pointless security flag that is opt-in. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: torvalds@linux-foundation.org (Linus Torvalds) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:12:21 -0800 Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v5 next 5/5] net: modules: use request_module_cap() to load 'netdev-%s' modules In-Reply-To: References: <1511803118-2552-1-git-send-email-tixxdz@gmail.com> <1511803118-2552-6-git-send-email-tixxdz@gmail.com> <1100603534.56586.1511871419952@ichabod.co-bxl> <20171128193243.4fymnjk7fplqw62x@thunk.org> Message-ID: To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > > Linus, are you okay with this series if the global sysctl gets dropped? So really, it's not the "global sysctl" as much as the "global request_module()" that annoys me. I'll happily take the request_module_cap() part and the thing that makes networking use that. But the flag that we have to default to off because it breaks every single box otherwise? No. It doesn't matter if it's one single global or just a "global behavior for request_module() for this process" at that point, it's still a pointless security flag that is opt-in. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linus971@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: <1511803118-2552-1-git-send-email-tixxdz@gmail.com> <1511803118-2552-6-git-send-email-tixxdz@gmail.com> <1100603534.56586.1511871419952@ichabod.co-bxl> <20171128193243.4fymnjk7fplqw62x@thunk.org> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:12:21 -0800 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v5 next 5/5] net: modules: use request_module_cap() to load 'netdev-%s' modules To: Kees Cook Cc: Theodore Ts'o , Djalal Harouni , Jonathan Corbet , James Morris , LSM List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , Geo Kozey List-ID: On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > > Linus, are you okay with this series if the global sysctl gets dropped? So really, it's not the "global sysctl" as much as the "global request_module()" that annoys me. I'll happily take the request_module_cap() part and the thing that makes networking use that. But the flag that we have to default to off because it breaks every single box otherwise? No. It doesn't matter if it's one single global or just a "global behavior for request_module() for this process" at that point, it's still a pointless security flag that is opt-in. Linus