From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] LSM: Blob sharing support for S.A.R.A and LandLock
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 08:19:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJs6kmd6Tjgwqb2Zx7e-jNbHqfJ57poZuyz4Qj=AKVfmQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhQN0wq0zZS5BYU9jBomaWvCaJ_BqJjHF3AT7FG8Z0nLDQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:16 AM, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:19 AM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
>> > Two proposed security modules require the ability to
>> > share security blobs with existing "major" security modules.
>> > These modules, S.A.R.A and LandLock, provide significantly
>> > different services than SELinux, Smack or AppArmor. Using
>> > either in conjunction with the existing modules is quite
>> > reasonable. S.A.R.A requires access to the cred blob, while
>> > LandLock uses the cred, file and inode blobs.
>> >
>> > The use of the cred, file and inode blobs has been
>> > abstracted in preceding patches in the series. This
>> > patch teaches the affected security modules how to access
>> > the part of the blob set aside for their use in the case
>> > where blobs are shared. The configuration option
>> > CONFIG_SECURITY_STACKING identifies systems where the
>> > blobs may be shared.
>> >
>> > The mechanism for selecting which security modules are
>> > active has been changed to allow non-conflicting "major"
>> > security modules to be used together. At this time the
>> > TOMOYO module can safely be used with any of the others.
>> > The two new modules would be non-conflicting as well.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
>> > ---
>> > Documentation/admin-guide/LSM/index.rst | 14 +++--
>> > include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 2 +-
>> > security/Kconfig | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> > security/apparmor/include/cred.h | 8 +++
>> > security/apparmor/include/file.h | 9 ++-
>> > security/apparmor/include/lib.h | 4 ++
>> > security/apparmor/lsm.c | 8 ++-
>> > security/security.c | 30 ++++++++-
>> > security/selinux/hooks.c | 3 +-
>> > security/selinux/include/objsec.h | 18 +++++-
>> > security/smack/smack.h | 19 +++++-
>> > security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 17 +++---
>> > security/tomoyo/common.h | 12 +++-
>> > security/tomoyo/tomoyo.c | 3 +-
>> > 14 files changed, 200 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> ...
>
>> > diff --git a/security/Kconfig b/security/Kconfig
>> > index 22f7664c4977..ed48025ae9e0 100644
>> > --- a/security/Kconfig
>> > +++ b/security/Kconfig
>> > @@ -36,6 +36,28 @@ config SECURITY_WRITABLE_HOOKS
>> > bool
>> > default n
>> >
>> > +config SECURITY_STACKING
>> > + bool "Security module stacking"
>> > + depends on SECURITY
>> > + help
>> > + Allows multiple major security modules to be stacked.
>> > + Modules are invoked in the order registered with a
>> > + "bail on fail" policy, in which the infrastructure
>> > + will stop processing once a denial is detected. Not
>> > + all modules can be stacked. SELinux, Smack and AppArmor are
>> > + known to be incompatible. User space components may
>> > + have trouble identifying the security module providing
>> > + data in some cases.
>> > +
>> > + If you select this option you will have to select which
>> > + of the stackable modules you wish to be active. The
>> > + "Default security module" will be ignored. The boot line
>> > + "security=" option can be used to specify that one of
>> > + the modules identifed for stacking should be used instead
>> > + of the entire stack.
>> > +
>> > + If you are unsure how to answer this question, answer N.
>>
>> I don't see a good reason to make this a config. Why shouldn't this
>> always be enabled?
>
> I do. From a user perspective it is sometimes difficult to determine
> the reason behind a failed operation; its is a DAC based denial, the
> LSM, or some other failure? Stacking additional LSMs has the
> potential to make this worse. The boot time configuration adds to the
> complexity.
Let me try to convince you otherwise. :) The reason I think there's no
need for this is because the only functional change here is how
_TOMOYO_ gets stacked. And in my proposal, we can convert TOMOYO to be
enabled/disabled like LoadPin. Given the configs I showed, stacking
TOMOYO with the other major LSMs becomes a config (and/or boottime)
option.
The changes for TOMOYO are still needed even _with_ SECURITY_STACKING,
and I argue that the other major LSMs remain the same. It's only
infrastructure that has changed. So, I think having SECURITY_STACKING
actually makes things more complex internally (all the ifdefs, weird
enable logic) and for distros ("what's this stacking option", etc?)
> I think we should leave this decision to the individual distros so
> that they can make their own decision on LSM stacking based on the
> savviness of their user base and the quality of their support
> infrastructure.
If we reach the "extreme" stacking case, then yes, I want to make sure
we've got something that makes sense. But this first step doesn't get
us there, so I'd prefer we avoid making it overly complex. I think
everything else in this series _reduces_ complexity, except for this
new config.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-13 20:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-11 16:26 [PATCH v2 00/10] LSM: Module stacking in support of S.A.R.A and Landlock Casey Schaufler
2018-09-11 16:41 ` [PATCH 01/10] procfs: add smack subdir to attrs Casey Schaufler
2018-09-12 22:57 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:41 ` [PATCH 02/10] Smack: Abstract use of cred security blob Casey Schaufler
2018-09-12 23:04 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:41 ` [PATCH 03/10] SELinux: " Casey Schaufler
2018-09-12 23:10 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:41 ` [PATCH 04/10] LSM: Infrastructure management of the " Casey Schaufler
2018-09-12 23:53 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-13 19:01 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 21:12 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:41 ` [PATCH 05/10] SELinux: Abstract use of file " Casey Schaufler
2018-09-12 23:54 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:42 ` [PATCH 06/10] LSM: Infrastructure management of the " Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 0:00 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:42 ` [PATCH 07/10] SELinux: Abstract use of inode " Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 0:23 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:42 ` [PATCH 08/10] Smack: " Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 0:24 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:42 ` [PATCH 09/10] LSM: Infrastructure management of the inode security Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 0:30 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-11 16:42 ` [PATCH 10/10] LSM: Blob sharing support for S.A.R.A and LandLock Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 4:19 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-13 13:16 ` Paul Moore
2018-09-13 15:19 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2018-09-13 19:12 ` Paul Moore
2018-09-13 20:58 ` Jordan Glover
2018-09-13 21:50 ` Paul Moore
2018-09-13 22:04 ` Jordan Glover
2018-09-13 23:01 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 21:01 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-13 21:38 ` Paul Moore
2018-09-13 21:51 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-13 23:06 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-13 23:32 ` John Johansen
2018-09-13 23:51 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-14 0:03 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-14 0:06 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-13 23:51 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-13 23:57 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-14 0:08 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-14 0:19 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-14 15:57 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-14 20:05 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-14 20:47 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-14 18:18 ` James Morris
2018-09-14 18:23 ` John Johansen
2018-09-14 0:03 ` Kees Cook
2018-09-14 2:42 ` Paul Moore
2018-09-11 20:43 ` [PATCH v2 00/10] LSM: Module stacking in support of S.A.R.A and Landlock James Morris
2018-09-12 21:29 ` James Morris
2018-09-16 16:54 ` Salvatore Mesoraca
2018-09-16 17:25 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-09-16 17:45 ` Salvatore Mesoraca
2018-09-18 7:44 ` Mickaël Salaün
2018-09-18 15:23 ` Casey Schaufler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAGXu5jJs6kmd6Tjgwqb2Zx7e-jNbHqfJ57poZuyz4Qj=AKVfmQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).