Re: OLS Bof info

From: MAILER-DAEMONat_private
Date: Mon Jul 01 2002 - 15:20:14 PDT

  • Next message: Ed Street: "RE: TE/DTE Patent issues?"

    * crispinat_private at '6/29/02 10:46 AM -0700'
    *
    * This issue has little to do with module stacking. It has to do with
    * version control of the interface between kernels and modules. The
    * pathology we seek to avoid is that the kernel is upgraded to a new LSM
    * interface that includes new/different hooks, and someone loads an older
    * module. We do not want the system to result in a "failed open" state
    * where some critical hook is *not* mediated because the older module did
    * not know that hook existed.
    
    How can it be critical ? The module wasn't written to support it ?
    
    As we're not using authoritative hooks we will always have built-in 
    decisions being made.
    
    I think we need to support running older modules on newer LSM 
    infrastructures, otherwise we're going to get into a viscious circle of 
    version-chicken (a module wants version LSM version X, version X wants 
    kernel Y, but I also need kernel Z (LSM version != X) because that is the 
    only version for which feature Q is available)...
    
    Confused ? You will be after this episode....
    
    *
    * Crispin
    *
    * --
    * Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    * Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com/~crispin/
    
    
    -
    richard offer @ home                        DSS  3072/1024 0x8AFBBFA3
            84 FE 48 E4 74 D0 26 D4  31 8E B6 86 98 74 E2 7C  8A FB BF A3
    _____________________________http://www.whitequeen.com/users/richard/
    _______________________________________________
    linux-security-module mailing list
    linux-security-moduleat_private
    http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jul 01 2002 - 15:49:28 PDT