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=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 77EC6C4646C for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 23:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5816420663 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 23:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728023AbfFXXBy (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:01:54 -0400 Received: from namei.org ([65.99.196.166]:47492 "EHLO namei.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726551AbfFXXBy (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:01:54 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by namei.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x5ON1iYt008506; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 23:01:44 GMT Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 09:01:44 +1000 (AEST) From: James Morris To: Matthew Garrett cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Smalley , Andy Lutomirski , John Johansen , Casey Schaufler Subject: Re: [PATCH V34 00/29] Lockdown as an LSM In-Reply-To: <20190622000358.19895-1-matthewgarrett@google.com> Message-ID: References: <20190622000358.19895-1-matthewgarrett@google.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 21 Jun 2019, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Minor updates over V33 - security_is_locked_down renamed to > security_locked_down, return value of security_locked_down is returned > in most cases, one unnecessary patch was dropped, couple of minor nits > fixed. Thanks for the respin. We are still not resolved on granularity. Stephen has said he's not sure if a useful policy can be constructed with just confidentiality and integrity settings. I'd be interested to know JJ and Casey's thoughts on lockdown policy flexibility wrt their respective LSMs. These are also "all or nothing" choices which may prevent deployment due to a user needing to allow (presumably controlled or mitigated) exceptions to the policy. -- James Morris