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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 3C76DC47082 for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:18:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1767F6136D for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:18:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230060AbhFESU1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2021 14:20:27 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f180.google.com ([209.85.208.180]:44911 "EHLO mail-lj1-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229996AbhFESUZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2021 14:20:25 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f180.google.com with SMTP id d2so11849178ljj.11 for ; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:18:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hWseLMsHC1Tl+tjltvawHbNPgfRx7qxCEi8/dkUNOU4=; b=dq91qTUDZfLAHHlQj01Xackwp7mLXGslcYSqKR8QjQWjay1MPlIiBx9Q2OjLRJv3Ny tUvoHIhp+fIOQUEt5cgx436HWwJytvd/+6hnvkb9my5cWuHI21RlTnevNOOSMWGTQ9Xp QlUNP5FJUEwnP+uHbMzVIztOiIoJLIajgm2Dk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hWseLMsHC1Tl+tjltvawHbNPgfRx7qxCEi8/dkUNOU4=; b=OXu+FPoJeoDVWVIs7TnPKET7EsWbPo4ypMbvv52RnHapSe08cd4O9C5LiEeFv38qCJ R3AqWrLNNkcTlIvXQIfQvPH1bC2s2mPV/zOXNu7Y7wpq3ruClsi9CATdeHtcCNgptfDu vPK7cJpMclRqSw6cD7CbrjoD68STvqs/XWhGDZ/XBKSIe8tVEjv8/09gUKeHtkkUILnk msZDItZUQ2wFbXGQ8kSynE9kvElXsM4nHc+3K1Smf4X0Zc9nKiTKrf9LXrT/qUN5qo/9 6PabMm8rC4WHZjd5OSVk0PcovSIlql73A+z2fIj5bjzfQ3QJnGgNsKe8f+tneDSrHkWa I3bg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Zp8CzLf7+4sEdC/9cLM/cRBnSNqS/Qcc5+axhklUCtVq6qEtw df97jiUlRWAvPxjO1X+JpgWKGYoUknmLVGav4a8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzWmE5XnWRQGJ2IqZ1+1Zy4YLfPOCnbfYMptYzUQ1oVVeMjUtLIwWacwLrduXzL+ORDResB+w== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:870d:: with SMTP id m13mr8346842lji.250.1622917040459; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-f53.google.com (mail-lf1-f53.google.com. [209.85.167.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h8sm930142lfv.52.2021.06.05.11.17.18 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f53.google.com with SMTP id f11so18992285lfq.4 for ; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:374b:: with SMTP id a11mr6305938lfs.377.1622917038058; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210517092006.803332-1-omosnace@redhat.com> <01135120-8bf7-df2e-cff0-1d73f1f841c3@iogearbox.net> <2e541bdc-ae21-9a07-7ac7-6c6a4dda09e8@iogearbox.net> <3ca181e3-df32-9ae0-12c6-efb899b7ce7a@iogearbox.net> <64552a82-d878-b6e6-e650-52423153b624@schaufler-ca.com> In-Reply-To: <64552a82-d878-b6e6-e650-52423153b624@schaufler-ca.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2021 11:17:02 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lockdown,selinux: avoid bogus SELinux lockdown permission checks To: Casey Schaufler Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Paul Moore , Daniel Borkmann , Ondrej Mosnacek , LSM List , James Morris , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Stephen Smalley , SElinux list , ppc-dev , Linux-Fsdevel , bpf , Network Development , LKML , Jiri Olsa , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Casey Schaufler wrote: > > You have fallen into a common fallacy. The fact that the "code runs" > does not assure that the "system works right". In the security world > we face this all the time, often with performance expectations. In this > case the BPF design has failed [..] I think it's the lockdown patches that have failed. They did the wrong thing, they didn't work, The report in question is for a regression. THERE ARE NO VALID ARGUMENTS FOR REGRESSIONS. Honestly, security people need to understand that "not working" is not a success case of security. It's a failure case. Yes, "not working" may be secure. But security in that case is *pointless*. Linus 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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 B4F2FC47082 for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:18:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41A9761263 for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 18:18:06 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 41A9761263 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Fy7Ct6kbkz302H for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 04:18:02 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=dq91qTUD; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linuxfoundation.org (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::22c; helo=mail-lj1-x22c.google.com; envelope-from=torvalds@linuxfoundation.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=dq91qTUD; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Fy7CF0cshz2ykR for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 04:17:26 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id 131so16017326ljj.3 for ; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hWseLMsHC1Tl+tjltvawHbNPgfRx7qxCEi8/dkUNOU4=; b=dq91qTUDZfLAHHlQj01Xackwp7mLXGslcYSqKR8QjQWjay1MPlIiBx9Q2OjLRJv3Ny tUvoHIhp+fIOQUEt5cgx436HWwJytvd/+6hnvkb9my5cWuHI21RlTnevNOOSMWGTQ9Xp QlUNP5FJUEwnP+uHbMzVIztOiIoJLIajgm2Dk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hWseLMsHC1Tl+tjltvawHbNPgfRx7qxCEi8/dkUNOU4=; b=F8unSVu98MOxSptc7NlxsXFVEhWgxpTTuu2LYuwk6LlRamZFJAvgdei088RHXsXrto y3Uj1UcXyy9VfCD7i+NO2aQwpsmKdfwsm0aj0IwtBEDIeKkNEDcpyVZEnII45C+7UHoD 8LqVavu+9rN03UNzAy23xWIaSzgFGf5qBfekijGODpS6dOUXqSeXV9edZHNhhwX39KgZ h1NXUTA4q4fXiHZfQd5dcCq1hrzcynZo6Em4XebooKhhZ9RNMnELGj03btumcoYGMoup LrHEcv/E8RU1ygqrEC/a9zPFIo+QIIfQ75Lnt/TkFZW2SykIFkaGzZ4PjEiAkzWz93wX 1n9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530cfWKhyHokj/sN2SGmOUEpKP7JngYSY59o4fDGPyHkwhmjfW6n GQhWLJpxKmCoCKPBT3jgFv7Vln3JYwZGAslzD1g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxDQ9376fYsncGsNm4YWDYIA7Uai1UA8MgZwGtVIqer0dF81HQBhEnNwaay54Mooo+XQ+6YeQ== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:331a:: with SMTP id d26mr8227665ljc.249.1622917039216; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-f44.google.com (mail-lf1-f44.google.com. [209.85.167.44]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w21sm1143869ljo.41.2021.06.05.11.17.18 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f44.google.com with SMTP id a2so19049729lfc.9 for ; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:374b:: with SMTP id a11mr6305938lfs.377.1622917038058; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 11:17:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210517092006.803332-1-omosnace@redhat.com> <01135120-8bf7-df2e-cff0-1d73f1f841c3@iogearbox.net> <2e541bdc-ae21-9a07-7ac7-6c6a4dda09e8@iogearbox.net> <3ca181e3-df32-9ae0-12c6-efb899b7ce7a@iogearbox.net> <64552a82-d878-b6e6-e650-52423153b624@schaufler-ca.com> In-Reply-To: <64552a82-d878-b6e6-e650-52423153b624@schaufler-ca.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2021 11:17:02 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lockdown,selinux: avoid bogus SELinux lockdown permission checks To: Casey Schaufler Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Jiri Olsa , Alexei Starovoitov , Paul Moore , Daniel Borkmann , "David S. Miller" , SElinux list , Network Development , Stephen Smalley , James Morris , Steven Rostedt , Ondrej Mosnacek , Andrii Nakryiko , LSM List , Ingo Molnar , Linux-Fsdevel , Jakub Kicinski , bpf , ppc-dev , Alexei Starovoitov , LKML Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Casey Schaufler wrote: > > You have fallen into a common fallacy. The fact that the "code runs" > does not assure that the "system works right". In the security world > we face this all the time, often with performance expectations. In this > case the BPF design has failed [..] I think it's the lockdown patches that have failed. They did the wrong thing, they didn't work, The report in question is for a regression. THERE ARE NO VALID ARGUMENTS FOR REGRESSIONS. Honestly, security people need to understand that "not working" is not a success case of security. It's a failure case. Yes, "not working" may be secure. But security in that case is *pointless*. Linus