On Thu, 23 Jan 2020, KP Singh wrote:

quoted

If you want to put mutable hook handling in the infrastructure
you need to make it general mutable hook handling as opposed to
BPF hook handling. I don't know if that would be acceptable for
all the reasons called out about dynamic module loading.

We can have generic mutable hook handling and if an LSM doesn't

--> provide a mutable security_hook_heads, it would not allow dynamic

hooks / dynamic module loading.

So, in practice it will just be the BPF LSM that allows mutable hooks
and the other existing LSMs won't. I guess it will be cleaner than
calling the BPF hooks directly from the LSM code (i.e in security.c)

I'm inclined to only have mutable hooks for KRSI, not for all LSMs. This 
is a special case and we don't need to provide this for anyone else.

Btw, folks, PLEASE trim replies.


-- 
James Morris
[off-list ref]