Re: [GIT PULL] security changes for v6.9-rc3

[Paul Moore]

On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 1:38 PM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmissioncom> wrote:
> Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > I know it's everyone's favorite hobby to bash the LSM and LSM devs,
> > but it's important to note that we don't add hooks without working
> > with the associated subsystem devs to get approval.
>
> Hah!!!!
>
> > In the cases
> > where we don't get an explicit ACK, there is an on-list approval, or
> > several ignored on-list attempts over weeks/months/years.  We want to
> > be good neighbors.
>
> Hah!!!!
>
> You merged a LSM hook that is only good for breaking chrome's sandbox,
> over my expressed objections.  After I tested and verified that
> is what it does.
>
> I asked for testing. None was done.  It was claimed that no
> security sensitive code would ever fail to check and deal with
> all return codes, so no testing was necessary.  Then later a
> whole bunch of security sensitive code that didn't was found.
>
> The only redeeming grace has been that no-one ever actually uses
> that misbegotten security hook.
>
> P.S.  Sorry for this off topic rant but sheesh.   At least from
> my perspective you deserve plenty of bashing.

Just in case people are reading this email and don't recall the
security_create_user_ns() hook discussions from 2022, I would suggest
reading those old threads and drawing your own conclusions.  A lore
link is below:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/?q=s%3Asecurity_create_user_ns

-- 
paul-moore.com