Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756470AbeAJBGn (ORCPT + 1 other); Tue, 9 Jan 2018 20:06:43 -0500 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:36956 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753876AbeAJBGk (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jan 2018 20:06:40 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Richard Guy Briggs Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Linux Containers , Linux API , Linux Audit , Linux FS Devel , Linux Kernel , Linux Network Development , Simo Sorce , Carlos O'Donell , Aristeu Rozanski , David Howells , Eric Paris , Daniel Walsh , jlayton@redhat.com, Andy Lutomirski , mszeredi@redhat.com, Paul Moore , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Steve Grubb , trondmy@primarydata.com, Al Viro , Madz Car References: <20180109121620.wi7dq2423ugsraqv@madcap2.tricolour.ca> Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2018 19:05:51 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20180109121620.wi7dq2423ugsraqv@madcap2.tricolour.ca> (Richard Guy Briggs's message of "Tue, 9 Jan 2018 07:16:20 -0500") Message-ID: <87k1wqcykw.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1eZ4qi-0006bb-Sn;;;mid=<87k1wqcykw.fsf@xmission.com>;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=67.3.133.177;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18NH3jI76nx7ZRv38VkPGFRv1mRu3vgipw= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.3.133.177 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: RFC(V3): Audit Kernel Container IDs X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Please let's have a description of the problem you are trying to solve. A proposed solution without talking about the problem space is useless. Any proposed solution could potentially work. I know to these exist. There is motivation for your work. What is the motivation? What problem are you trying to solve? In particular what information are you trying to get into logs that you can not get into the logs today? I am going to try to give this the attention it deserves but right now I am having to deal with half thought out patches for information leaks from speculative code paths, so I won't be able to give this much attention for a little bit. Eric