[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:51:06 -0500
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Matt Brown <matt@...tt.com>,
Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com>,
Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>,
PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] S.A.R.A. a new stacked LSM
Quoting Mimi Zohar (zohar@...ux.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.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
