Re: [PATCH security-next v5 12/30] LSM: Provide separate ordered initialization
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Date: 2018-11-05 14:14:21
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, lkml
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Date: 2018-11-05 14:14:21
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, lkml
On Fri, 2018-11-02 at 13:49 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Mimi Zohar [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
I don't recall why "integrity" is on the security_initcall, while both IMA and EVM are on the late_initcall().It's because integrity needs to have a VFS buffer allocated extremely early, so it used the security init to do it. While it's not an LSM, it does use this part of LSM infrastructure. I didn't see an obvious alternative at the time, but now that I think about it, maybe just a simple postcore_initcall() would work?
I was questioning why the "security_initcall", which is called after the late_initcall. Moving it to the postcore_initcall, before the late_initcall, sounds right. Mimi