Thread (46 messages) 46 messages, 7 authors, 2022-11-11

Re: [PATCH v1 7/8] LSM: Create lsm_module_list system call

From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date: 2022-11-10 03:18:11
Also in: linux-api, lkml

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 8:37 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:
On 11/9/2022 3:35 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 2:48 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Create a system call to report the list of Linux Security Modules
that are active on the system. The list is provided as an array
of LSM ID numbers.

The calling application can use this list determine what LSM
specific actions it might take. That might include chosing an
output format, determining required privilege or bypassing
security module specific behavior.

Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
---
 include/linux/syscalls.h |  1 +
 kernel/sys_ni.c          |  1 +
 security/lsm_syscalls.c  | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+)
..
quoted
diff --git a/security/lsm_syscalls.c b/security/lsm_syscalls.c
index da0fab7065e2..cd5db370b974 100644
--- a/security/lsm_syscalls.c
+++ b/security/lsm_syscalls.c
@@ -154,3 +154,41 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(lsm_self_attr,
        kfree(final);
        return rc;
 }
+
+/**
+ * lsm_module_list - Return a list of the active security modules
+ * @ids: the LSM module ids
+ * @size: size of @ids, updated on return
+ * @flags: reserved for future use, must be zero
+ *
+ * Returns a list of the active LSM ids. On success this function
+ * returns the number of @ids array elements. This value may be zero
+ * if there are no LSMs active. If @size is insufficient to contain
+ * the return data -E2BIG is returned and @size is set to the minimum
+ * required size. In all other cases a negative value indicating the
+ * error is returned.
+ */
Let's make a promise that for this syscall we will order the LSM IDs
in the array in the same order as which they are configured/executed.
Sure. Order registered, which can vary, as opposed to LSM ID order,
which cannot. That could be important to ensure that applications
that enforce the same policy as the kernel will hit the checks in
the same order as the kernel. That's how it is coded. It needs to
be documented.
Yep.  One of the big reasons for documenting it this way is to ensure
that we define the order as part of the API.

-- 
paul-moore.com
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help