Re: [PATCH security-next v4 23/32] selinux: Remove boot parameter
From: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
Date: 2018-10-03 13:16:07
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, lkml
From: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
Date: 2018-10-03 13:16:07
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, lkml
On 10/02/2018 05:12 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 5:05 PM, John Johansen [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 10/02/2018 04:54 PM, Kees Cook wrote:quoted
That's not how I have it currently. It's a comma-separated a string, including the reserved name "all". The default would just be "CONFIG_LSM_ENABLE=all". Casey and I wanted this to have a way to capture new LSMs by default at build-time.I understand where you are coming from, but speaking with my distro hat on, that is not going to work. As a distro Ubuntu very much wants to be able to offer all the LSMs built in to the kernel so the user can select them. But very much wants to be able to specify a default supported subset that is enabled at boot. I expect RH and Suse will feel similarily. Speaking for Ubuntu if this isn't available as part of lsm stacking it will get distro patched in.Right. Ubuntu would do something like: CONFIG_LSM_ENABLE=yama,apparmor,integrity And that's why I wanted non-explicit lsm.enable, so that an end user could just do: lsm.enable=loadpin to add loadpin. Perhaps we could have both? "lsm.enable=+loadpin" (add loadpin to build default list) vs "lsm.enable=loadpin" (override build default list with ONLY loadpin).
Maybe? I'm not sure what the best option is with all the competing requirements/desires. I need to think about it more and would like to see what others think.