Re: [PATCH] per-process securebits

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:17:22 +0000
Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri 2008-02-01 20:07:01, James Morris wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 
> > > Really?  I'd feel a lot more comfortable if yesterday's version 1 had led
> > > to a stream of comments from suitably-knowledgeable kernel developers which
> > > indicated that those developers had scrutinised this code from every
> > > conceivable angle and had declared themselves 100% happy with it.
> > 
> > FWIW, I've reviewed the patch in detail a couple of times, and don't see 
> > any issues with it that haven't already been raised by Serge.
> > 
> > You can add my reviewed-by.
> > 
> > I think it does need more eyes, and some time baking in -mm.  
> 
> I don't thing -mm baking helps here. People playing with -mm are not
> the ones trying to hack your box.
> 

That's for sure.  Whitebox testing and really really careful review
is our best shot with this stuff.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/