Re: [PATCH linux-next] security: Fix side effects of default BPF LSM hooks

On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 9:00 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:

On 6/10/2022 11:50 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote:

quoted

On 6/9/2022 4:46 PM, KP Singh wrote:

quoted

BPF LSM currently has a default implementation for each LSM hooks which
return a default value defined in include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h. These
hooks should have no functional effect when there is no BPF program
loaded to implement the hook logic.

What I failed to point out earlier is that you really want general
LSM stacking for BPF to work the way you want it to. Reviewed-bys,

Happy to take a look, but we should fix this bug independently though.

Acked-bys and other participation in that effort would be most
appreciated.