From: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org
Cc: keescook@chromium.org, penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp,
paul@paul-moore.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 22/23] LSM: Add /proc attr entry for full LSM context
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 12:59:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e6e2f466-5553-b3ad-7856-f422713dfb21@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9afb8d9d-a590-0e13-bf46-53a347ea15dd@schaufler-ca.com>
On 1/24/20 11:28 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 1/24/2020 8:20 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote:
>> On 1/24/20 9:42 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote:
>>> On 1/23/20 7:23 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>>> Add an entry /proc/.../attr/context which displays the full
>>>> process security "context" in compound format:'
>>>> lsm1\0value\0lsm2\0value\0...
>>>> This entry is not writable.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
>>>> Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org
>>>
>>> As previously discussed, there are issues with AppArmor's implementation of getprocattr() particularly around the trailing newline that dbus-daemon and perhaps others would like to see go away in any new interface. Hence, I don't think we should implement this new API using the existing getprocattr() hook lest it also be locked into the current behavior forever.
>>
>> Also, it would be good if whatever hook is introduced to support /proc/pid/attr/context could also be leveraged by the SO_PEERCONTEXT implementation in the future so that we are guaranteed a consistent result between the two interfaces, unlike the current situation for /proc/self/attr/current versus SO_PEERSEC.
>
> I don't believe that a new hook is necessary, and that introducing one
> just to deal with a '\n' would be pedantic. We really have two rational
> options. AppArmor could drop the '\n' from their "context". Or, we can
> simply document that the /proc/pid/attr/context interface will trim any
> trailing whitespace. I understand that this would be a break from the
> notion that the LSM infrastructure does not constrain what a module uses
> for its own data. On the other hand, we have been saying that "context"s
> are strings, and ignoring trailing whitespace is usual behavior for
> strings.
>
>
AppArmor can drop the trailing '\n' it is not required. I would say it
could be dropped from /proc/pid/attr/current except there may be some
third party code that requires it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-03 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20200124002306.3552-1-casey.ref@schaufler-ca.com>
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 00/23] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 01/23] LSM: Infrastructure management of the sock security Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 02/23] LSM: Create and manage the lsmblob data structure Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 14:21 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 03/23] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 04/23] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_kernel_act_as Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 05/23] net: Prepare UDS for security module stacking Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 06/23] Use lsmblob in security_secctx_to_secid Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 14:29 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 07/23] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 08/23] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_ipc_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 09/23] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_task_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 10/23] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_inode_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 11/23] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_cred_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 12/23] IMA: Change internal interfaces to use lsmblobs Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 13/23] LSM: Specify which LSM to display Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 14/23] LSM: Ensure the correct LSM context releaser Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 15/23] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:22 ` [PATCH v14 16/23] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_inode_getsecctx Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:23 ` [PATCH v14 17/23] LSM: security_secid_to_secctx in netlink netfilter Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:23 ` [PATCH v14 18/23] NET: Store LSM netlabel data in a lsmblob Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 14:36 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-24 0:23 ` [PATCH v14 19/23] LSM: Verify LSM display sanity in binder Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:23 ` [PATCH v14 20/23] Audit: Add subj_LSM fields when necessary Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:23 ` [PATCH v14 21/23] Audit: Include object data for all security modules Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 0:23 ` [PATCH v14 22/23] LSM: Add /proc attr entry for full LSM context Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 14:42 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-24 16:20 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-24 19:28 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 20:16 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-27 20:05 ` Simon McVittie
2020-02-03 20:54 ` John Johansen
2020-01-27 22:49 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-01-31 22:10 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-02-03 18:54 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-02-03 19:37 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-02-03 21:39 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-02-04 13:37 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-02-04 17:14 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-02-10 11:56 ` Simon McVittie
2020-02-10 13:25 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-02-10 14:55 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-02-10 18:32 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-02-10 19:00 ` John Johansen
2020-02-11 15:59 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-02-11 17:58 ` John Johansen
2020-02-11 18:35 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-02-11 19:11 ` John Johansen
2020-02-10 18:56 ` John Johansen
2020-02-03 21:02 ` John Johansen
2020-02-03 21:43 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-02-03 22:49 ` John Johansen
2020-02-03 20:59 ` John Johansen [this message]
2020-01-24 0:23 ` [PATCH v14 23/23] AppArmor: Remove the exclusive flag Casey Schaufler
2020-01-24 15:05 ` [PATCH v14 00/23] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Stephen Smalley
2020-01-24 21:04 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-24 21:49 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-01-27 16:14 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-27 16:56 ` KASAN slab-out-of-bounds in tun_chr_open/sock_init_data (Was: Re: [PATCH v14 00/23] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor) Stephen Smalley
2020-01-27 17:34 ` Casey Schaufler
2020-01-27 17:16 ` [PATCH v14 00/23] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor 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=e6e2f466-5553-b3ad-7856-f422713dfb21@canonical.com \
--to=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.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@vger.kernel.org \
/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).