[PATCH v2 security-next 1/4] security: Hornet LSM
Blaise Boscaccy
bboscaccy at linux.microsoft.com
Wed Apr 16 17:31:18 UTC 2025
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov at gmail.com> writes:
> History repeats itself.
> 1. the problem is hard.
> 2. you're only interested in addressing your own use case.
> There is no end-to-end design here and no attempt to
> think it through how it will work for others.
>
Well, I suppose anything worth doing is going to be hard :)
The end-to-end design for this is the same end-to-end design that exists
for signing kernel modules today. We envisioned it working for others
the same way module signing works for others.
> Hacking into bpf internal objects like maps is not acceptable.
We've heard your concerns about kern_sys_bpf and we agree that the LSM
should not be calling it. The proposal in this email should meet both of
our needs
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/874iypjl8t.fsf@microsoft.com/
-blaise
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list