All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
To: casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org
Cc: casey@schaufler-ca.com, linux-audit@redhat.com,
	keescook@chromium.org, john.johansen@canonical.com,
	penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, paul@paul-moore.com,
	sds@tycho.nsa.gov, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v29 04/28] IMA: avoid label collisions with stacked LSMs
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 10:54:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210924175441.7943-5-casey@schaufler-ca.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210924175441.7943-1-casey@schaufler-ca.com>

Integrity measurement may filter on security module information
and needs to be clear in the case of multiple active security
modules which applies. Provide a boot option ima_rules_lsm= to
allow the user to specify an active securty module to apply
filters to. If not specified, use the first registered module
that supports the audit_rule_match() LSM hook. Allow the user
to specify in the IMA policy an lsm= option to specify the
security module to use for a particular rule.

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
---
 Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy |  8 ++-
 security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c  | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
index 5c2798534950..fb2b66b3c1e7 100644
--- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
+++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Description:
 			base:	[[func=] [mask=] [fsmagic=] [fsuuid=] [uid=]
 				[euid=] [fowner=] [fsname=]]
 			lsm:	[[subj_user=] [subj_role=] [subj_type=]
-				 [obj_user=] [obj_role=] [obj_type=]]
+				 [obj_user=] [obj_role=] [obj_type=] [lsm=]]
 			option:	[[appraise_type=]] [template=] [permit_directio]
 				[appraise_flag=] [appraise_algos=] [keyrings=]
 		  base:
@@ -122,6 +122,12 @@ Description:
 
 			measure subj_user=_ func=FILE_CHECK mask=MAY_READ
 
+		It is possible to explicitly specify which security
+		module a rule applies to using lsm=.  If the security
+		modules specified is not active on the system the rule
+		will be rejected.  If lsm= is not specified the first
+		security module registered on the system will be assumed.
+
 		Example of measure rules using alternate PCRs::
 
 			measure func=KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK pcr=4
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
index cbe6f1244e31..af278e225f9e 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
@@ -82,9 +82,10 @@ struct ima_rule_entry {
 	bool (*uid_op)(kuid_t, kuid_t);    /* Handlers for operators       */
 	bool (*fowner_op)(kuid_t, kuid_t); /* uid_eq(), uid_gt(), uid_lt() */
 	int pcr;
+	int which_lsm; /* which of the rules to use */
 	unsigned int allowed_algos; /* bitfield of allowed hash algorithms */
 	struct {
-		void *rules[LSMBLOB_ENTRIES]; /* LSM file metadata specific */
+		void *rule;	/* LSM file metadata specific */
 		char *args_p;	/* audit value */
 		int type;	/* audit type */
 	} lsm[MAX_LSM_RULES];
@@ -96,17 +97,17 @@ struct ima_rule_entry {
 
 /**
  * ima_lsm_isset - Is a rule set for any of the active security modules
- * @rules: The set of IMA rules to check
+ * @entry: the rule entry to examine
+ * @lsm_rule: the specific rule type in question
  *
- * If a rule is set for any LSM return true, otherwise return false.
+ * If a rule is set return true, otherwise return false.
  */
-static inline bool ima_lsm_isset(void *rules[])
+static inline bool ima_lsm_isset(struct ima_rule_entry *entry, int lsm_rule)
 {
-	int i;
-
-	for (i = 0; i < LSMBLOB_ENTRIES; i++)
-		if (rules[i])
-			return true;
+	if (lsm_rule < 0 || lsm_rule > MAX_LSM_RULES)
+		return false;
+	if (entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rule)
+		return true;
 	return false;
 }
 
@@ -294,6 +295,20 @@ static int __init default_appraise_policy_setup(char *str)
 }
 __setup("ima_appraise_tcb", default_appraise_policy_setup);
 
+static int ima_rules_lsm __ro_after_init;
+
+static int __init ima_rules_lsm_init(char *str)
+{
+	ima_rules_lsm = lsm_name_to_slot(str);
+	if (ima_rules_lsm < 0) {
+		ima_rules_lsm = 0;
+		pr_err("rule lsm \"%s\" not registered", str);
+	}
+
+	return 1;
+}
+__setup("ima_rules_lsm=", ima_rules_lsm_init);
+
 static struct ima_rule_opt_list *ima_alloc_rule_opt_list(const substring_t *src)
 {
 	struct ima_rule_opt_list *opt_list;
@@ -363,11 +378,10 @@ static void ima_free_rule_opt_list(struct ima_rule_opt_list *opt_list)
 static void ima_lsm_free_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
 {
 	int i;
-	int r;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) {
-		for (r = 0; r < LSMBLOB_ENTRIES; r++)
-			ima_filter_rule_free(entry->lsm[i].rules[r]);
+		if (entry->lsm[i].rule)
+			ima_filter_rule_free(entry->lsm[i].rule);
 		kfree(entry->lsm[i].args_p);
 	}
 }
@@ -418,8 +432,8 @@ static struct ima_rule_entry *ima_lsm_copy_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
 
 		ima_filter_rule_init(nentry->lsm[i].type, Audit_equal,
 				     nentry->lsm[i].args_p,
-				     &nentry->lsm[i].rules[0]);
-		if (!ima_lsm_isset(nentry->lsm[i].rules))
+				     &nentry->lsm[i].rule);
+		if (!ima_lsm_isset(nentry, i))
 			pr_warn("rule for LSM \'%s\' is undefined\n",
 				nentry->lsm[i].args_p);
 	}
@@ -608,7 +622,7 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule,
 		int rc = 0;
 		u32 osid;
 
-		if (!ima_lsm_isset(rule->lsm[i].rules)) {
+		if (!ima_lsm_isset(rule, i)) {
 			if (!rule->lsm[i].args_p)
 				continue;
 			else
@@ -621,14 +635,14 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule,
 			security_inode_getsecid(inode, &osid);
 			rc = ima_filter_rule_match(osid, rule->lsm[i].type,
 						   Audit_equal,
-						   rule->lsm[i].rules);
+						   rule->lsm[i].rule);
 			break;
 		case LSM_SUBJ_USER:
 		case LSM_SUBJ_ROLE:
 		case LSM_SUBJ_TYPE:
 			rc = ima_filter_rule_match(secid, rule->lsm[i].type,
 						   Audit_equal,
-						   rule->lsm[i].rules);
+						   rule->lsm[i].rule);
 			break;
 		default:
 			break;
@@ -1017,7 +1031,7 @@ enum {
 	Opt_uid_lt, Opt_euid_lt, Opt_fowner_lt,
 	Opt_appraise_type, Opt_appraise_flag, Opt_appraise_algos,
 	Opt_permit_directio, Opt_pcr, Opt_template, Opt_keyrings,
-	Opt_label, Opt_err
+	Opt_lsm, Opt_label, Opt_err
 };
 
 static const match_table_t policy_tokens = {
@@ -1056,6 +1070,7 @@ static const match_table_t policy_tokens = {
 	{Opt_template, "template=%s"},
 	{Opt_keyrings, "keyrings=%s"},
 	{Opt_label, "label=%s"},
+	{Opt_lsm, "lsm=%s"},
 	{Opt_err, NULL}
 };
 
@@ -1064,7 +1079,7 @@ static int ima_lsm_rule_init(struct ima_rule_entry *entry,
 {
 	int result;
 
-	if (ima_lsm_isset(entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rules))
+	if (ima_lsm_isset(entry, lsm_rule))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	entry->lsm[lsm_rule].args_p = match_strdup(args);
@@ -1074,8 +1089,8 @@ static int ima_lsm_rule_init(struct ima_rule_entry *entry,
 	entry->lsm[lsm_rule].type = audit_type;
 	result = ima_filter_rule_init(entry->lsm[lsm_rule].type, Audit_equal,
 				      entry->lsm[lsm_rule].args_p,
-				      &entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rules[0]);
-	if (!ima_lsm_isset(entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rules)) {
+				      &entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rule);
+	if (!ima_lsm_isset(entry, lsm_rule)) {
 		pr_warn("rule for LSM \'%s\' is undefined\n",
 			entry->lsm[lsm_rule].args_p);
 
@@ -1680,6 +1695,19 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
 						 &(template_desc->num_fields));
 			entry->template = template_desc;
 			break;
+		case Opt_lsm:
+			result = lsm_name_to_slot(args[0].from);
+			if (result == LSMBLOB_INVALID) {
+				int i;
+
+				for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++)
+					entry->lsm[i].args_p = NULL;
+				result = -EINVAL;
+				break;
+			}
+			entry->which_lsm = result;
+			result = 0;
+			break;
 		case Opt_err:
 			ima_log_string(ab, "UNKNOWN", p);
 			result = -EINVAL;
@@ -1716,6 +1744,7 @@ ssize_t ima_parse_add_rule(char *rule)
 	struct ima_rule_entry *entry;
 	ssize_t result, len;
 	int audit_info = 0;
+	int i;
 
 	p = strsep(&rule, "\n");
 	len = strlen(p) + 1;
@@ -1733,6 +1762,9 @@ ssize_t ima_parse_add_rule(char *rule)
 
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&entry->list);
 
+	for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++)
+		entry->which_lsm = ima_rules_lsm;
+
 	result = ima_parse_rule(p, entry);
 	if (result) {
 		ima_free_rule(entry);
@@ -1972,7 +2004,7 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 	}
 
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) {
-		if (ima_lsm_isset(entry->lsm[i].rules)) {
+		if (ima_lsm_isset(entry, i)) {
 			switch (i) {
 			case LSM_OBJ_USER:
 				seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_obj_user),
@@ -2014,6 +2046,9 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 		seq_puts(m, "appraise_flag=check_blacklist ");
 	if (entry->flags & IMA_PERMIT_DIRECTIO)
 		seq_puts(m, "permit_directio ");
+	if (entry->which_lsm >= 0)
+		seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_lsm),
+			   lsm_slot_to_name(entry->which_lsm));
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 	seq_puts(m, "\n");
 	return 0;
-- 
2.31.1


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
To: casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org
Cc: john.johansen@canonical.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-audit@redhat.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov
Subject: [PATCH v29 04/28] IMA: avoid label collisions with stacked LSMs
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 10:54:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210924175441.7943-5-casey@schaufler-ca.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210924175441.7943-1-casey@schaufler-ca.com>

Integrity measurement may filter on security module information
and needs to be clear in the case of multiple active security
modules which applies. Provide a boot option ima_rules_lsm= to
allow the user to specify an active securty module to apply
filters to. If not specified, use the first registered module
that supports the audit_rule_match() LSM hook. Allow the user
to specify in the IMA policy an lsm= option to specify the
security module to use for a particular rule.

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
---
 Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy |  8 ++-
 security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c  | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
index 5c2798534950..fb2b66b3c1e7 100644
--- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
+++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Description:
 			base:	[[func=] [mask=] [fsmagic=] [fsuuid=] [uid=]
 				[euid=] [fowner=] [fsname=]]
 			lsm:	[[subj_user=] [subj_role=] [subj_type=]
-				 [obj_user=] [obj_role=] [obj_type=]]
+				 [obj_user=] [obj_role=] [obj_type=] [lsm=]]
 			option:	[[appraise_type=]] [template=] [permit_directio]
 				[appraise_flag=] [appraise_algos=] [keyrings=]
 		  base:
@@ -122,6 +122,12 @@ Description:
 
 			measure subj_user=_ func=FILE_CHECK mask=MAY_READ
 
+		It is possible to explicitly specify which security
+		module a rule applies to using lsm=.  If the security
+		modules specified is not active on the system the rule
+		will be rejected.  If lsm= is not specified the first
+		security module registered on the system will be assumed.
+
 		Example of measure rules using alternate PCRs::
 
 			measure func=KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK pcr=4
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
index cbe6f1244e31..af278e225f9e 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
@@ -82,9 +82,10 @@ struct ima_rule_entry {
 	bool (*uid_op)(kuid_t, kuid_t);    /* Handlers for operators       */
 	bool (*fowner_op)(kuid_t, kuid_t); /* uid_eq(), uid_gt(), uid_lt() */
 	int pcr;
+	int which_lsm; /* which of the rules to use */
 	unsigned int allowed_algos; /* bitfield of allowed hash algorithms */
 	struct {
-		void *rules[LSMBLOB_ENTRIES]; /* LSM file metadata specific */
+		void *rule;	/* LSM file metadata specific */
 		char *args_p;	/* audit value */
 		int type;	/* audit type */
 	} lsm[MAX_LSM_RULES];
@@ -96,17 +97,17 @@ struct ima_rule_entry {
 
 /**
  * ima_lsm_isset - Is a rule set for any of the active security modules
- * @rules: The set of IMA rules to check
+ * @entry: the rule entry to examine
+ * @lsm_rule: the specific rule type in question
  *
- * If a rule is set for any LSM return true, otherwise return false.
+ * If a rule is set return true, otherwise return false.
  */
-static inline bool ima_lsm_isset(void *rules[])
+static inline bool ima_lsm_isset(struct ima_rule_entry *entry, int lsm_rule)
 {
-	int i;
-
-	for (i = 0; i < LSMBLOB_ENTRIES; i++)
-		if (rules[i])
-			return true;
+	if (lsm_rule < 0 || lsm_rule > MAX_LSM_RULES)
+		return false;
+	if (entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rule)
+		return true;
 	return false;
 }
 
@@ -294,6 +295,20 @@ static int __init default_appraise_policy_setup(char *str)
 }
 __setup("ima_appraise_tcb", default_appraise_policy_setup);
 
+static int ima_rules_lsm __ro_after_init;
+
+static int __init ima_rules_lsm_init(char *str)
+{
+	ima_rules_lsm = lsm_name_to_slot(str);
+	if (ima_rules_lsm < 0) {
+		ima_rules_lsm = 0;
+		pr_err("rule lsm \"%s\" not registered", str);
+	}
+
+	return 1;
+}
+__setup("ima_rules_lsm=", ima_rules_lsm_init);
+
 static struct ima_rule_opt_list *ima_alloc_rule_opt_list(const substring_t *src)
 {
 	struct ima_rule_opt_list *opt_list;
@@ -363,11 +378,10 @@ static void ima_free_rule_opt_list(struct ima_rule_opt_list *opt_list)
 static void ima_lsm_free_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
 {
 	int i;
-	int r;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) {
-		for (r = 0; r < LSMBLOB_ENTRIES; r++)
-			ima_filter_rule_free(entry->lsm[i].rules[r]);
+		if (entry->lsm[i].rule)
+			ima_filter_rule_free(entry->lsm[i].rule);
 		kfree(entry->lsm[i].args_p);
 	}
 }
@@ -418,8 +432,8 @@ static struct ima_rule_entry *ima_lsm_copy_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
 
 		ima_filter_rule_init(nentry->lsm[i].type, Audit_equal,
 				     nentry->lsm[i].args_p,
-				     &nentry->lsm[i].rules[0]);
-		if (!ima_lsm_isset(nentry->lsm[i].rules))
+				     &nentry->lsm[i].rule);
+		if (!ima_lsm_isset(nentry, i))
 			pr_warn("rule for LSM \'%s\' is undefined\n",
 				nentry->lsm[i].args_p);
 	}
@@ -608,7 +622,7 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule,
 		int rc = 0;
 		u32 osid;
 
-		if (!ima_lsm_isset(rule->lsm[i].rules)) {
+		if (!ima_lsm_isset(rule, i)) {
 			if (!rule->lsm[i].args_p)
 				continue;
 			else
@@ -621,14 +635,14 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule,
 			security_inode_getsecid(inode, &osid);
 			rc = ima_filter_rule_match(osid, rule->lsm[i].type,
 						   Audit_equal,
-						   rule->lsm[i].rules);
+						   rule->lsm[i].rule);
 			break;
 		case LSM_SUBJ_USER:
 		case LSM_SUBJ_ROLE:
 		case LSM_SUBJ_TYPE:
 			rc = ima_filter_rule_match(secid, rule->lsm[i].type,
 						   Audit_equal,
-						   rule->lsm[i].rules);
+						   rule->lsm[i].rule);
 			break;
 		default:
 			break;
@@ -1017,7 +1031,7 @@ enum {
 	Opt_uid_lt, Opt_euid_lt, Opt_fowner_lt,
 	Opt_appraise_type, Opt_appraise_flag, Opt_appraise_algos,
 	Opt_permit_directio, Opt_pcr, Opt_template, Opt_keyrings,
-	Opt_label, Opt_err
+	Opt_lsm, Opt_label, Opt_err
 };
 
 static const match_table_t policy_tokens = {
@@ -1056,6 +1070,7 @@ static const match_table_t policy_tokens = {
 	{Opt_template, "template=%s"},
 	{Opt_keyrings, "keyrings=%s"},
 	{Opt_label, "label=%s"},
+	{Opt_lsm, "lsm=%s"},
 	{Opt_err, NULL}
 };
 
@@ -1064,7 +1079,7 @@ static int ima_lsm_rule_init(struct ima_rule_entry *entry,
 {
 	int result;
 
-	if (ima_lsm_isset(entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rules))
+	if (ima_lsm_isset(entry, lsm_rule))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	entry->lsm[lsm_rule].args_p = match_strdup(args);
@@ -1074,8 +1089,8 @@ static int ima_lsm_rule_init(struct ima_rule_entry *entry,
 	entry->lsm[lsm_rule].type = audit_type;
 	result = ima_filter_rule_init(entry->lsm[lsm_rule].type, Audit_equal,
 				      entry->lsm[lsm_rule].args_p,
-				      &entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rules[0]);
-	if (!ima_lsm_isset(entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rules)) {
+				      &entry->lsm[lsm_rule].rule);
+	if (!ima_lsm_isset(entry, lsm_rule)) {
 		pr_warn("rule for LSM \'%s\' is undefined\n",
 			entry->lsm[lsm_rule].args_p);
 
@@ -1680,6 +1695,19 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
 						 &(template_desc->num_fields));
 			entry->template = template_desc;
 			break;
+		case Opt_lsm:
+			result = lsm_name_to_slot(args[0].from);
+			if (result == LSMBLOB_INVALID) {
+				int i;
+
+				for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++)
+					entry->lsm[i].args_p = NULL;
+				result = -EINVAL;
+				break;
+			}
+			entry->which_lsm = result;
+			result = 0;
+			break;
 		case Opt_err:
 			ima_log_string(ab, "UNKNOWN", p);
 			result = -EINVAL;
@@ -1716,6 +1744,7 @@ ssize_t ima_parse_add_rule(char *rule)
 	struct ima_rule_entry *entry;
 	ssize_t result, len;
 	int audit_info = 0;
+	int i;
 
 	p = strsep(&rule, "\n");
 	len = strlen(p) + 1;
@@ -1733,6 +1762,9 @@ ssize_t ima_parse_add_rule(char *rule)
 
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&entry->list);
 
+	for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++)
+		entry->which_lsm = ima_rules_lsm;
+
 	result = ima_parse_rule(p, entry);
 	if (result) {
 		ima_free_rule(entry);
@@ -1972,7 +2004,7 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 	}
 
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) {
-		if (ima_lsm_isset(entry->lsm[i].rules)) {
+		if (ima_lsm_isset(entry, i)) {
 			switch (i) {
 			case LSM_OBJ_USER:
 				seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_obj_user),
@@ -2014,6 +2046,9 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 		seq_puts(m, "appraise_flag=check_blacklist ");
 	if (entry->flags & IMA_PERMIT_DIRECTIO)
 		seq_puts(m, "permit_directio ");
+	if (entry->which_lsm >= 0)
+		seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_lsm),
+			   lsm_slot_to_name(entry->which_lsm));
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 	seq_puts(m, "\n");
 	return 0;
-- 
2.31.1

--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-09-24 17:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20210924175441.7943-1-casey.ref@schaufler-ca.com>
2021-09-24 17:54 ` [PATCH v29 00/28] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 01/28] LSM: Infrastructure management of the sock security Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 02/28] LSM: Add the lsmblob data structure Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 03/28] LSM: provide lsm name and id slot mappings Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` Casey Schaufler [this message]
2021-09-24 17:54     ` [PATCH v29 04/28] IMA: avoid label collisions with stacked LSMs Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 05/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 06/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_kernel_act_as Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 07/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secctx_to_secid Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 08/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 09/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_ipc_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 10/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_task_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 11/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_inode_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 12/28] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_cred_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 13/28] IMA: Change internal interfaces to use lsmblobs Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 14/28] LSM: Specify which LSM to display Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 15/28] LSM: Ensure the correct LSM context releaser Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 16/28] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 17/28] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_inode_getsecctx Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 18/28] LSM: security_secid_to_secctx in netlink netfilter Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 19/28] NET: Store LSM netlabel data in a lsmblob Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 20/28] LSM: Verify LSM display sanity in binder Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 21/28] LSM: Extend security_secid_to_secctx to include module selection Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 22/28] Audit: Keep multiple LSM data in audit_names Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 23/28] Audit: Create audit_stamp structure Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 24/28] Audit: Add framework for auxiliary records Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 25/28] Audit: Add record for multiple task security contexts Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 26/28] Audit: Add record for multiple object " Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 27/28] LSM: Add /proc attr entry for full LSM context Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54   ` [PATCH v29 28/28] AppArmor: Remove the exclusive flag Casey Schaufler
2021-09-24 17:54     ` 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=20210924175441.7943-5-casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --to=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
    --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@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 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.