From: "Edwin Zimmerman" <edwin@211mainstreet.net>
To: "'Casey Schaufler'" <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
"'LSM'" <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: New LSM hooks
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 15:10:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <000001d4bd8e$c7c5c620$57515260$@211mainstreet.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c15e8f04-df2e-40f4-d227-754d03de3dd0@schaufler-ca.com>
On Tuesday, February 05, 2019 12:40 PM Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 2/5/2019 10:28 AM, Edwin Zimmerman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 05, 2019 12:40 PM Casey Schaufler wrote:
> >...
> > Here's my suggestion for starters. According to kernel documentation, new
> > LSMs must be documented before being accepted. Perhaps we need a
> > similar requirement for LSM hooks.
>
> That would be handy. The documentation would need to cover
> the purpose for the hook and how a security module would be
> expected to use it.
>
> > As I see it, LSMs are security additions,
> > not functionality patches for the rest of the kernel or for special hardware or
> > whatever. Therefore, I also suggest that all new hooks be implemented in
> > at least two LSMs before being accepted.
>
> I can't say this makes sense. The binder hooks are only
> useful for Android, and requiring Smack or AppArmor hooks
> be implemented isn't reasonable. It would be reasonable for
> the kernfs hook, as the kernfs hook is a workaround for the
> fact that kernfs doesn't use inodes.
You have a good point there. I withdraw my "two LSMs" suggestions.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-05 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-05 17:40 New LSM hooks Casey Schaufler
2019-02-05 18:15 ` Paul Moore
2019-02-05 20:04 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-06 0:01 ` Paul Moore
2019-02-06 1:11 ` James Morris
2019-02-06 13:20 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-02-06 17:24 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-06 17:44 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-02-06 18:18 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-06 16:30 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-06 17:06 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-02-06 17:44 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-06 17:48 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-02-05 18:28 ` Edwin Zimmerman
2019-02-05 19:25 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-05 19:58 ` Paul Moore
2019-02-05 20:10 ` Edwin Zimmerman [this message]
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='000001d4bd8e$c7c5c620$57515260$@211mainstreet.net' \
--to=edwin@211mainstreet.net \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=linux-security-module@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.