Thread (56 messages) 56 messages, 8 authors, 2018-09-16

[PATCH 10/10] LSM: Blob sharing support for S.A.R.A and LandLock

From: paul@paul-moore.com (Paul Moore)
Date: 2018-09-14 07:55:26
Also in: linux-fsdevel, lkml, selinux

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 5:52 PM Kees Cook [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Paul Moore [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
The infrastructure bits aren't really my concern; in fact I *like*
that the infrastructure is always exercised, it makes
testing/debugging easier.  I also like the ability to limit the
user/admin to one LSM at boot time to make support easier; my goal is
to allow a distro to build support for multiple LSMs without also
requiring that distro to support *stacked* LSMs
I see your point, but as soon as SARA and Landlock appear, they'll have:

    depends on SECURITY_STACKING

and then all distros will enable it and there will be no sensible
runtime way to manage it. If, instead, we make it entirely runtime
now, then a CONFIG can control the default state and we can provide
guidance to how SARA and Landlock should expose their "enable"ness.
I question why SARA and LandLock require stacking.  While some LSMs
may benefit from stacking, e.g. Yama, traditionally each LSM has been
able to stand on its own.  I think this is a quality that should be
preserved.
quoted
(see my earlier
comments about the difficulty in determining the source of a failed
operation).
Agreed. I would hope that audit could help for that case. *stare at blue sky*
*also staring at blue sky*

Audit can help, but it is independent of the LSMs and not a hard
requirement for all, and even when it is enabled the config might not
be suitable to provide enough information to be helpful in this case.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help