Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> writes: > On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Mimi Zohar <zo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> This method is a consistent and extensible approach to verifying the >> integrity of file data/metadata, including kernel modules. The only >> downside to this approach, I think, is that it requires changes to the >> userspace tool. > > I'm fine with this -- it's an expected change that I'll pursue with > glibc, kmod, etc. Without the userspace changes, nothing will use the > new syscall. :) I've already got kmod (and older module-init-tools) > patched to do this locally.
A syscall is the right way to do this. But does it need to be done? 1) Do the LSM guys really want this hook? 2) Do we have a userspace which uses it? If yes to both, and noone comes up with any creative complaints, I will take the patch. Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
