On Mon, 2020-09-07 at 12:50 +0100, Luke Hinds wrote:

quoted

Candidly, given the politics of security technology being viewed as
'constraining' user rights, I think that a lot of forthcoming security
technology may end up being out of tree moving forward.

I think it's prudent to look forward and plan diligently, but I would
not want perfect to be the enemy of good.

Agreed.  This isn't an abstract problem, but one that has already come
up and, hopefully, has been addressed appropriately.

I approach this more from a user's perspective. We are using IMA in 
https://keylime.dev to measure a host and would like to measure
within a container too. It's the most common request we hear from our
users.

Perhaps we all collaborate on a proposal extending Stefans work here:
https://kernsec.org/wiki/index.php/IMA_Namespacing_design_considerati
ons

I have seen around 3-4 patches now get submitted, so work has been
done before, and as above, users are present too. We could then have
some consensus on how this should look and later patches might have
more success at landing.

Would anyone be interested in this and have recommendations on how we
could approach this?

When Roberto Sassu and Krzysztof Struczynski contacted me about the
status of Stefan Berger's patch set, based on Yuqiong Sun's work, I was
under the impression that they would be rebasing it on the latest
kernel and going forward from there.   Obviously things changed.  I
pointed out to them resolving the "IMA namespacing" issue would be the
first thing that needs to be addressed.  So here we are.

Definitely, let's have this discussion.

Mimi