On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 8:03 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:
On 11/9/2022 3:34 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
quoted
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' :)
Works for me. It's also worth noting that this struct isn't part of
the UAPI so if we need to change it in the future we can.
--
paul-moore.com