From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71113C169C4 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 17:49:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 401362073D for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 17:49:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=tycho.nsa.gov header.i=@tycho.nsa.gov header.b="U7lGBhzK" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728937AbfBFRtA (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:49:00 -0500 Received: from ucol19pa12.eemsg.mail.mil ([214.24.24.85]:62831 "EHLO ucol19pa12.eemsg.mail.mil" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726989AbfBFRtA (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:49:00 -0500 X-EEMSG-check-017: 683099568|UCOL19PA12_EEMSG_MP10.csd.disa.mil X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,340,1544486400"; d="scan'208";a="683099568" Received: from emsm-gh1-uea10.ncsc.mil ([214.29.60.2]) by ucol19pa12.eemsg.mail.mil with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA256; 06 Feb 2019 17:48:54 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=tycho.nsa.gov; i=@tycho.nsa.gov; q=dns/txt; s=tycho.nsa.gov; t=1549475334; x=1581011334; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6O7I3zsbfHCsghpfXOkqGj0sk8tP8jaqkeBMkOX14J8=; b=U7lGBhzK/3ioAm8AlE1IfJ7qOR+s/Ly4HmEPcZTEdPwRmMXNT24Vvg8/ Zh6z19Lo1hxWF41PMjprn05ChmJkjryoxj12E83CMUilMQO2xq6AK0mq8 Yv4GM+4jBN4bJBRSa8IMyHdtdFLoCFgLcILIKqPg2iRBFUFf3ZbjeMEMy e6rMOnUrKWQVVJzg2xhLO3/L1Q0hOfP+nxQjvzqDhE2F5nMnY8E8icYm3 X2dkjksHg/FmKX7RKnvoeYWMMF+C/7DnJousJGJM8sk++xuMmmoXLeyXO FOrkDIlHq8gfRo0o0qYIQ2QwVWSc+TVMQC+UkLgHqbp92EwGAyjtbwk8T w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,340,1544486400"; d="scan'208";a="20269519" IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3ArPuxIxbAc0A+OCAM5fZfBTb/LSx+4OfEezUN45?= =?us-ascii?q?9isYplN5qZpsy8ZR7h7PlgxGXEQZ/co6odzbaO4+a4ASQp2tWoiDg6aptCVh?= =?us-ascii?q?sI2409vjcLJ4q7M3D9N+PgdCcgHc5PBxdP9nC/NlVJSo6lPwWB6nK94iQPFR?= =?us-ascii?q?rhKAF7Ovr6GpLIj8Swyuu+54Dfbx9HiTahYr5+Ngm6oRnMvcQKnIVuLbo8xA?= =?us-ascii?q?HUqXVSYeRWwm1oJVOXnxni48q74YBu/SdNtf8/7sBMSar1cbg2QrxeFzQmLn?= =?us-ascii?q?s65Nb3uhnZTAuA/WUTX2MLmRdVGQfF7RX6XpDssivms+d2xSeXMdHqQb0yRD?= =?us-ascii?q?+v9LlgRgP2hygbNj456GDXhdJ2jKJHuxKquhhzz5fJbI2JKPZye6XQct0ARW?= =?us-ascii?q?pFQ81fSSpPDI2hZIcLFuYNI/pUo4z7qlATrxWxGBOsCfvyxDFWiH/43a403e?= =?us-ascii?q?ovHg7J3gMvA90AvW/IrNj2LqoeTfy5wafKwDjFcvhY2S396I/Nch05vP+MQa?= =?us-ascii?q?x/cdLRyUYxEQPOk0ieqYn/MDOR0uQCrWia5PdnWOK0lmEnsBp8oiSvx8gwio?= =?us-ascii?q?nJgZgZylbf9Spj2oo1Ktq4SFBibNOiDZBetDmaOpNrTs4tTGxkoiY3xqActZ?= =?us-ascii?q?KlcyUG1o4rywPZZveaaYaH+AjjW/yUITpggXJlf6+wiAiq/Ei7z+38StG00F?= =?us-ascii?q?FXripZitXMtm4C1xjU6sWfVvty5F2h2TeS1wDI8O1EPUA1mrbbK54m2LIwkI?= =?us-ascii?q?YcsV/fESPsnUX2jauWel0l+uiu9evnfq3rqoKTOoJ7kA3zMrkiltahDek3LA?= =?us-ascii?q?QCRXWX9fy51LL5/E35RLtKjucxkqncqJ3aPtkUprWiDg9J0ocs9xa/DzC83N?= =?us-ascii?q?QehnkINkhJeB2Aj4j3I13OOuz3De+jg1Swlzdm3+zJMaf6AprTLnnOi6zhcq?= =?us-ascii?q?p960FG1Qozw9Rf6IxOCr0YPP38QFX9u8DfDh88Kwa02froCM1h1oMCXmKCGq?= =?us-ascii?q?2ZMKbVsV+S/OIvIvKMaZQTuDnnLvgq+f/ugWU+mV8HcqmjxYEXZ2ygHvR6P0?= =?us-ascii?q?WZZmLhgs8bHmcXugozV/Tqh0efUT5XfnqyWqU85jYhCI24F4vMWoetgLmZ1i?= =?us-ascii?q?ehApJWfnxGCkyLEXrwc4WEWvEMaD+dI8N4iTwLS6SuS5I71RGvqA/7y6NrLu?= =?us-ascii?q?/T+iIFqJLj0MZ66vbNlRE96zN0Fd6R02KTQGFumGMHWTs20Lp4oUxnxVfQmZ?= =?us-ascii?q?R/1tdRDtFCr8hCUg4nO5rR1aQuANnpVxPpZdyJQUuoRti8RDo4CNk2xolKK2?= =?us-ascii?q?R0Hti5xjXExTCrGPdBlbmMHoY16Yra1n38JoB60XmQkOEZhkQiCu5IMnerzv?= =?us-ascii?q?pn/hXXL5bAjkHckqGtb6la1ynIojSt122L6XpEXRZwXKONZnUWYk/bvJyt/U?= =?us-ascii?q?/ZZ6O/ArQgdA1awIiNLbUcOY6htklPWPq2YIeWWGm2gWrlQE/Snr4=3D?= X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A2BYAgCGHVtc/wHyM5BlGwEBAQEDAQEBBwMBAQGBZYFbK?= =?us-ascii?q?YEzBTKEKpQGUgaBCAgliTWQVTgBhEACgxoiOBIBAwEBAQEBAQIBbCiCOikBg?= =?us-ascii?q?mcBBSMPAQVBEAsYAgImAgJXBgEMCAEBgl8/gXUNrS+BL4VEhHKBC4s4F3iBB?= =?us-ascii?q?4E4DIFhfogKglcCkTqRTgmSPQYZkk6IdoE2k0shgVYrCAIYCCEPGiGCbYInF?= =?us-ascii?q?4EAAQKNOSEDgTUBAY1zAQE?= Received: from tarius.tycho.ncsc.mil ([144.51.242.1]) by EMSM-GH1-UEA10.NCSC.MIL with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2019 17:48:54 +0000 Received: from moss-pluto.infosec.tycho.ncsc.mil (moss-pluto.infosec.tycho.ncsc.mil [192.168.25.131]) by tarius.tycho.ncsc.mil (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x16HmrA0030677; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:48:53 -0500 Subject: Re: New LSM hooks To: Casey Schaufler , James Morris , Paul Moore Cc: LSM References: <61766e1d-496e-6a7d-d4b8-52e2c99a78c3@schaufler-ca.com> <6598f48a-f50f-1976-f766-126c0a43f7d9@tycho.nsa.gov> <7e13bda3-9ef2-d382-19d8-f96203c81395@schaufler-ca.com> From: Stephen Smalley Message-ID: <09d3bd67-17ca-4674-dd27-b6613adc0210@tycho.nsa.gov> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:48:53 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7e13bda3-9ef2-d382-19d8-f96203c81395@schaufler-ca.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 2/6/19 12:44 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 2/6/2019 9:06 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: >> On 2/6/19 11:30 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote: >>> On 2/5/2019 5:11 PM, James Morris wrote: >>>> On Tue, 5 Feb 2019, Paul Moore wrote: >>>> >>>>> I believe that will always be a problem, no matter what we do.  The >>>>> point I was trying to make was that everyone, especially the >>>>> maintainers, need to watch for this when patches are posted and make >>>>> sure the patch author posts to the LSM list in addition to any of the >>>>> relevant LSM specific lists. >>>> Right, and there is no way a new LSM hook should ever be added to the >>>> kernel without review and ack/signoffs from folks on the LSM list >>>> (especially those who are maintainers of in-tree LSMs). >>>> >>>> Casey, do you have any examples of this happening? >>> >>> overlayfs (according to my records - which may be flawed) >>> is a prime example. Inifiniband hooks were reviewed/acked >>> for SELinux, but there was never an attempt made to work >>> with other security module maintainers. Yes, they were posted >>> to LSM, but under the title "SELinux support for Infiniband". >> >> overlayfs hooks were also posted to and discussed on lsm list, including comments from you.  Admittedly the cover patch said Overlayfs SELinux Support but the individual patches for the hooks were "security, overlayfs: provide copy up security hook for unioned files" and "security,overlayfs: Provide security hook for copy up of xattrs for overlay file". > > OK, apologies all around. My records are still better > than my memory, but neither is perfect. > >> >> In either case, did you request a change that was ignored? > > Smack support was definitely not included. I started > getting complaints almost immediately when overlayfs > hit upstream. You can't expect the developer to supply a Smack implementation of the hook if they aren't using Smack themselves. On the other hand, absence of a hook implementation shouldn't break existing users. So if that was the case, then there was a bug in the hook's fallback behavior.