[PATCH v4 next 1/3] modules:capabilities: allow __request_module() to take a capability argument

Djalal Harouni tixxdz at gmail.com
Sat Sep 2 06:31:05 UTC 2017

Hi Kees,

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Kees Cook <keescook at google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Djalal Harouni <tixxdz at gmail.com> wrote:
>> BTW Kees, also in next version I won't remove the
>> capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN) check from [1]
>> even if there is the new request_module_cap(), I would like it to be
>> in a different patches, this way we go incremental
>> and maybe it is better to merge what we have now ?  and follow up
>> later, and of course if other maintainers agree too!
> Yes, incremental. I would suggest first creating the API changes to
> move a basic require_cap test into the LSM (which would drop the
> open-coded capable() checks in the net code), and then add the
> autoload logic in the following patches. That way the "infrastructure"
> changes happen separately and do not change any behaviors, but moves
> the caps test down where its wanted in the LSM, before then augmenting
> the logic.
>> I just need a bit of free time to check again everything and will send
>> a v5 with all requested changes.
> Great, thank you!

So sorry was busy these last months, I picked it again, will send v5 after the
merge window.

Kees I am looking on a way to integrate a test for it, we should use
something like
the example here [1] or maybe something else ? and which module to use ?

I still did not sort this out, if anyone has some suggestions, thank
you in advance!

[1] http://openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/05/22/7

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

More information about the Linux-security-module-archive mailing list