[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: [PATCH v5 1/2] x86/speculation: apply IBPB more strictly to avoid cross-process data leak
On Mon, 10 Sep 2018, Schaufler, Casey wrote:

> Why are you dropping the LSM check here, when in v4 you fixed the
> SELinux audit locking issue? We can avoid introducing an LSM hook
> and all the baggage around it if you can do the security_ptrace_access_check()
> here.

So what guarantees that none of the hooks that
security_ptrace_access_check() is invoking will not be taking locks (from
scheduler context in this case)?


Jiri Kosina

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-10 21:14    [W:0.182 / U:3.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site