From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from sonic304-28.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([66.163.191.154]:33989
        "EHLO sonic304-28.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726890AbeINFUc (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 14 Sep 2018 01:20:32 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] LSM: Blob sharing support for S.A.R.A and LandLock
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        SE Linux <selinux@tycho.nsa.gov>,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
        "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@intel.com>
References: <cbf848ae-a1ac-c5ab-f23b-bc9217fceebe@schaufler-ca.com>
 <99cb1ae7-8881-eb9a-a8cb-a787abe454e1@schaufler-ca.com>
 <CAGXu5jLONSfPHYYYTLSma-+arVHSQKaEWb9JxpOn6TNKtyLNhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHC9VhQN0wq0zZS5BYU9jBomaWvCaJ_BqJjHF3AT7FG8Z0nLDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5jJs6kmd6Tjgwqb2Zx7e-jNbHqfJ57poZuyz4Qj=AKVfmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHC9VhQ20tBAMwOJ9mg0tBHYUoxjh0Szr3d62HuPw2SyT4XDLw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5jKec1JTsoqwKGThcJoamdL618AHu4jfFbqqQiauz1kjyg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHC9VhQwT4d3wC37cVrrX-hZq1L3e6=TEAse4m-YH9SiFnkieA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5jLapViSK-j08Tq8cCZodiZXFsXze71xFPg6MQhDWDHDAA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5j+j47FH5RF2vrJh95=YFX76oSBFo8O6GZqa0utcfE1AVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <d1d12866-d557-8c15-6506-a54b9d927952@schaufler-ca.com>
 <CAGXu5jJG=wk6e_RU=KYDY48kOc=RmL3OB79T+rHqCyzaDSn=zg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Message-ID: <5b983bba-049c-795a-3354-a2e8ab33cecf@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 17:08:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jJG=wk6e_RU=KYDY48kOc=RmL3OB79T+rHqCyzaDSn=zg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On 9/13/2018 4:57 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
>> On 9/13/2018 4:06 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> - what order should any stacking happen? Makefile? security=?
>> Makefile by default.
> Okay, if ordering is by Makefile and everyone dislikes my
> $lsm.enabled=0/1 thing, then these mean the same thing:
>
> security=selinux,tomoyo
> security=tomoyo,selinux
>
> i.e. order of security= is _ignored_ in favor of the Makefile ordering.

No, I think that the two lines above should have a different
execution order. If we really need to specify multiple modules
at boot time that is what makes the most sense.

It's a matter of mechanics and probably another pass during the
init process, but it's doable. If we determine it's necessary for
this stage it is just work.