From: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Cc: LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
keescook@chromium.org, SElinux list <selinux@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: LSM stacking in next for 6.1?
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2022 18:56:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5ad95e3a-b0ea-f619-7ef3-483356da550d@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhSF8hWg=7tbFiCrizNF61vpwJcU3793LcStiu-anW4i1g@mail.gmail.com>
On 8/2/22 17:56, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 8:01 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
>> I would like very much to get v38 or v39 of the LSM stacking for Apparmor
>> patch set in the LSM next branch for 6.1. The audit changes have polished
>> up nicely and I believe that all comments on the integrity code have been
>> addressed. The interface_lsm mechanism has been beaten to a frothy peak.
>> There are serious binder changes, but I think they address issues beyond
>> the needs of stacking. Changes outside these areas are pretty well limited
>> to LSM interface improvements.
>
> The LSM stacking patches are near the very top of my list to review
> once the merge window clears, the io_uring fixes are in (bug fix), and
> SCTP is somewhat sane again (bug fix). I'm hopeful that the io_uring
> and SCTP stuff can be finished up in the next week or two.
>
> Since I'm the designated first stuckee now for the stacking stuff I
> want to go back through everything with fresh eyes, which probably
> isn't a bad idea since it has been a while since I looked at the full
> patchset from bottom to top. I can tell you that I've never been
> really excited about the /proc changes, and believe it or not I've
> been thinking about those a fair amount since James asked me to start
> maintaining the LSM. I don't want to get into any detail until I've
> had a chance to look over everything again, but just a heads-up that
> I'm not too excited about those bits.
>
I am slowly working my way through the complete stack of patches again as
well. I have pulled them into a test branch for Ubuntu 22.10 and the
plan is to get them out into our -proposed kernels for broader testing in
the next couple of weeks
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Cc: SElinux list <selinux@vger.kernel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-audit@redhat.com
Subject: Re: LSM stacking in next for 6.1?
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2022 18:56:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5ad95e3a-b0ea-f619-7ef3-483356da550d@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhSF8hWg=7tbFiCrizNF61vpwJcU3793LcStiu-anW4i1g@mail.gmail.com>
On 8/2/22 17:56, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 8:01 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
>> I would like very much to get v38 or v39 of the LSM stacking for Apparmor
>> patch set in the LSM next branch for 6.1. The audit changes have polished
>> up nicely and I believe that all comments on the integrity code have been
>> addressed. The interface_lsm mechanism has been beaten to a frothy peak.
>> There are serious binder changes, but I think they address issues beyond
>> the needs of stacking. Changes outside these areas are pretty well limited
>> to LSM interface improvements.
>
> The LSM stacking patches are near the very top of my list to review
> once the merge window clears, the io_uring fixes are in (bug fix), and
> SCTP is somewhat sane again (bug fix). I'm hopeful that the io_uring
> and SCTP stuff can be finished up in the next week or two.
>
> Since I'm the designated first stuckee now for the stacking stuff I
> want to go back through everything with fresh eyes, which probably
> isn't a bad idea since it has been a while since I looked at the full
> patchset from bottom to top. I can tell you that I've never been
> really excited about the /proc changes, and believe it or not I've
> been thinking about those a fair amount since James asked me to start
> maintaining the LSM. I don't want to get into any detail until I've
> had a chance to look over everything again, but just a heads-up that
> I'm not too excited about those bits.
>
I am slowly working my way through the complete stack of patches again as
well. I have pulled them into a test branch for Ubuntu 22.10 and the
plan is to get them out into our -proposed kernels for broader testing in
the next couple of weeks
--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-03 1:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 148+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <791e13b5-bebd-12fc-53de-e9a86df23836.ref@schaufler-ca.com>
2022-08-03 0:01 ` LSM stacking in next for 6.1? Casey Schaufler
2022-08-03 0:01 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-08-03 0:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-08-03 0:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-08-03 1:56 ` John Johansen [this message]
2022-08-03 1:56 ` John Johansen
2022-08-03 2:15 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-08-03 2:15 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-08-03 2:33 ` Paul Moore
2022-08-03 2:33 ` Paul Moore
2022-08-03 2:34 ` Steve Grubb
2022-08-03 2:34 ` Steve Grubb
2022-08-03 2:40 ` Paul Moore
2022-08-03 2:40 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-02 21:30 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-02 21:30 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-02 23:14 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-02 23:14 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-02 23:57 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-02 23:57 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-06 23:24 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-06 23:24 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 0:10 ` John Johansen
2022-09-07 0:10 ` John Johansen
2022-09-07 0:39 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 0:39 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 0:50 ` John Johansen
2022-09-07 0:50 ` John Johansen
2022-09-07 14:41 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 14:41 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 16:41 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 16:41 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 17:23 ` John Johansen
2022-09-07 17:23 ` John Johansen
2022-09-07 22:57 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 22:57 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 23:27 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 23:27 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 23:53 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 23:53 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-08 0:19 ` John Johansen
2022-09-08 0:19 ` John Johansen
2022-09-08 3:57 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-08 3:57 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-08 18:05 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-08 18:05 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-08 18:35 ` John Johansen
2022-09-08 18:35 ` John Johansen
2022-09-08 19:32 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-08 19:32 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-08 22:56 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-08 22:56 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-10 4:17 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-10 4:17 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-12 17:37 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-12 17:37 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-13 10:47 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-13 10:47 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-13 14:45 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-13 14:45 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-14 13:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-14 13:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-14 15:50 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-14 15:50 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-15 14:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-15 14:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-15 14:54 ` John Johansen
2022-09-15 14:54 ` John Johansen
2022-09-15 7:45 ` John Johansen
2022-09-15 7:45 ` John Johansen
2022-09-15 14:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-15 14:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-25 9:48 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-25 9:48 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-25 10:26 ` John Johansen
2022-10-25 10:26 ` John Johansen
2022-10-25 11:20 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-25 11:20 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-25 14:12 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-25 14:12 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-25 22:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-25 22:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-25 22:41 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-25 22:41 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-26 10:19 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-26 10:19 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-26 15:30 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-26 15:30 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-28 10:14 ` John Johansen
2022-10-28 10:14 ` John Johansen
2022-10-30 4:03 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-30 4:03 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-30 7:23 ` John Johansen
2022-10-30 7:23 ` John Johansen
2022-10-30 14:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-30 14:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-30 16:37 ` Kees Cook
2022-10-30 16:37 ` Kees Cook
2022-10-30 20:56 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-30 20:56 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-31 10:26 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-31 10:26 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-31 15:47 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-31 15:47 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-10-26 20:11 ` Paul Moore
2022-10-26 20:11 ` Paul Moore
2022-10-27 0:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-27 0:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-28 9:50 ` Paul Moore
2022-10-28 9:50 ` Paul Moore
2022-10-28 13:58 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-28 13:58 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-28 17:40 ` Kees Cook
2022-10-28 17:40 ` Kees Cook
2022-10-29 9:33 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-10-29 9:33 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-14 13:42 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-14 13:42 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-27 20:54 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-27 20:54 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-27 22:37 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-27 22:37 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 0:31 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 0:31 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 15:13 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 15:13 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 17:08 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 17:08 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 23:04 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 23:04 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-07 23:26 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-07 23:26 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-08 15:18 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-08 15:18 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-08 16:00 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-08 16:00 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-08 18:52 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-08 18:52 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-09 11:32 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-09 11:32 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-14 13:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-14 13:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-15 14:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-15 14:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-15 15:50 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-15 15:50 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-16 13:34 ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-09-16 13:34 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=5ad95e3a-b0ea-f619-7ef3-483356da550d@canonical.com \
--to=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
/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.