On 11/9/2022 3:34 PM, Paul Moore wrote:

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 2:47 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Add an integer member "features" to the struct lsm_id which
identifies the API related data associated with each security
module. The initial set of features maps to information that
has traditionaly been available in /proc/self/attr.

Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
---
 include/linux/lsm_hooks.h  |  1 +
 include/uapi/linux/lsm.h   | 14 ++++++++++++++
 security/apparmor/lsm.c    |  1 +
 security/selinux/hooks.c   |  2 ++
 security/smack/smack_lsm.c |  1 +
 5 files changed, 19 insertions(+)

Everything Greg already said with one additional comment below.

quoted

diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
index dd4b4d95a172..46b2aa6a677e 100644
--- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
+++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h

@@ -1608,6 +1608,7 @@ struct security_hook_heads {
 struct lsm_id {
        const char      *lsm;           /* Name of the LSM */
        int             id;             /* LSM ID */
+       int             features;       /* Set of LSM features */

I understand why you called the field "features", but I worry it is a
bit too generic for 32-bits of flags. Let's make it specific to the
LSM label attributes; how about 'feat_attr', 'sup_attr', or something
along those lines?

How about 'attrs_used'? I'm open to anything except 'late_for_dinner' :) 

--
paul-moore.com