On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Tom Gundersen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Lucas De Marchi
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm no huge fan of this feature. Indeed I think it's a pretty broken
>> feature (just not as broken as the install rules we need to carry for
>> compatibility reasons). I also think that for people that needs this a
>> custom kernel with things compiled-in would be way better.
>
> Just to add my two cents to the 'this is a bad idea'-choir: This
> feature seems to be at the wrong level of the stack. There is nothing
> forcing you to use libkmod to load modules, so there would be no
> guarantee that only the modules on the white-list can be loaded (i.e.,
> adding this feature would not have the same guarantee as rebuilding
> the kernel with only the whitelisted modules enabled, contrary to what
> I guess one would expect?).

You are not incorrect, however rebuilding the kernel isn't always an
option.

> Could you do something similar to what was done with finit_module()
> and the kernel_module_from_file hook? With the right security module
> it seems like you should be able to catch all modules and verify that
> they conform to whatever criterion you have.

That is also something to look into.

josh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-modules" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to