From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Cedric Xing <cedric.xing@intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>,
"Dr . Greg Wettstein" <greg@enjellic.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 06:55:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190618135525.GA13781@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <05bcc1e2-0bd7-dcb9-02c3-969f4484a5fc@tycho.nsa.gov>
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:38:19AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On 6/17/19 6:24 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >My original plan was for my next RFC to be an implementation of Andy's
> >proposed "dynamic tracking" model. I actually finished the tracking
> >portion, but was completely flummoxed by the auditing[1]. Since Cedric's
> >RFC is essentially a variation of the dynamic tracking model, it too has
> >the same auditing complexities. End result, I ended back at the "make
> >userspace state its intentions" approach.
> >
> >Except for patch 12 (see below), the SGX changes have been fully tested,
> >including updating the kernel's selftest as well as my own fork of (an old
> >version of) Intel's SDK to use the new UAPI. The LSM changes have been
> >smoke tested, but I haven't actually configured AppArmor or SELinux to
> >verify the permissions work as intended.
>
> Was dropping linux-security-module and selinux lists intentional for this
> RFC? Not recommended.
Yes, my thought was to keep the noise to the sgx list until we at least
agree on a direction for the SGX UAPI. I am fully expecting that whatever
LSM and SELinux patches we end up with will go through a lot more scrutiny
when Jarkko sends them with his SGX series.
Anyways, would you like me to resend the series to Cc the aforementioned
lists?
> Is the entire series aside from patch 12 available in a public tree
> somewhere?
I pushed tag 'sgx-lsm-v3' to https://github.com/sean-jc/linux.git.
> Ultimately we'll want additions to the selinux-testsuite that exercise each
> of the new permissions, both a permission denied scenario and a permission
> allowed scenario.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-18 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-17 22:24 [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3 Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/12] x86/sgx: Add mm to enclave at mmap() Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:32 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 23:42 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18 14:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 16:06 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 12:56 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 13:00 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-20 20:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/12] x86/sgx: Do not naturally align MAP_FIXED address Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 13:24 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 14:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-20 22:07 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/12] selftests: x86/sgx: Mark the enclave loader as not needing an exec stack Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] x86/sgx: Require userspace to define enclave pages' protection bits Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:43 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 15:20 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-20 22:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-07 19:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-08 15:23 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-08 16:19 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-09 16:06 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-10 17:25 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-15 22:29 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-01 16:38 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-08-04 22:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-05 20:51 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-08-05 21:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-07 18:51 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/12] x86/sgx: Enforce noexec filesystem restriction for enclaves Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:46 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/12] mm: Introduce vm_ops->may_mprotect() Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Introduce ->enclave_map() hook for Intel SGX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/12] security/selinux: Require SGX_EXECMEM to map enclave page WX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Introduce ->enclave_load() hook for Intel SGX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:56 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 21:13 ` James Morris
2019-06-20 9:28 ` Dr. Greg
2019-06-20 22:22 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-23 17:16 ` Dr. Greg
2019-06-26 20:39 ` James Morris
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/12] security/selinux: Add enclave_load() implementation Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 14:49 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-06-19 20:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/12] security/apparmor: " Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 12/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Show line of sight to LSM support SGX2's EAUG Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 13:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3 Stephen Smalley
2019-06-18 13:55 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2019-06-18 15:13 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-06-25 16:29 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
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=20190618135525.GA13781@linux.intel.com \
--to=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=cedric.xing@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=greg@enjellic.com \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jethro@fortanix.com \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=sds@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.