Re: [PATCH] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: 2019-02-11 23:10:31
Also in:
lkml
On 2/11/2019 2:54 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is used on the command line, and report that it is happening. Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <redacted> --- security/security.c | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c index 3147785e20d7..e6153ed54361 100644 --- a/security/security.c +++ b/security/security.c@@ -288,9 +288,13 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_init(void) ordered_lsms = kcalloc(LSM_COUNT + 1, sizeof(*ordered_lsms), GFP_KERNEL); - if (chosen_lsm_order) + if (chosen_lsm_order) { + if (chosen_major_lsm) { + pr_info("security= is ignored because of lsm=\n");
This is a little awkward. How about "lsm= supersedes security=".
+ chosen_major_lsm = NULL; + } ordered_lsm_parse(chosen_lsm_order, "cmdline"); - else + } else ordered_lsm_parse(builtin_lsm_order, "builtin"); for (lsm = ordered_lsms; *lsm; lsm++)