From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yb1-f193.google.com ([209.85.219.193]:34317 "EHLO mail-yb1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727330AbeJCDO4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2018 23:14:56 -0400 Received: by mail-yb1-f193.google.com with SMTP id 184-v6so1398736ybg.1 for ; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 13:29:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw1-f45.google.com (mail-yw1-f45.google.com. [209.85.161.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k17-v6sm4464679ywk.47.2018.10.02.13.29.44 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Oct 2018 13:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-f45.google.com with SMTP id l79-v6so1341183ywc.7 for ; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 13:29:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <125243f2-8532-c0c0-0b0e-d28b3ecb910e@canonical.com> References: <20181002005505.6112-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20181002005505.6112-24-keescook@chromium.org> <785ef6a9-ae46-3533-0348-74bcf6f10928@tycho.nsa.gov> <809f1cfd-077b-ee58-51ba-b22daf46d12b@tycho.nsa.gov> <125243f2-8532-c0c0-0b0e-d28b3ecb910e@canonical.com> From: Kees Cook Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 13:29:42 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH security-next v4 23/32] selinux: Remove boot parameter Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: John Johansen Cc: Jordan Glover , Stephen Smalley , Paul Moore , James Morris , Casey Schaufler , Tetsuo Handa , "Schaufler, Casey" , linux-security-module , Jonathan Corbet , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-arch , LKML Message-ID: <20181002202942.eF0HOGgO6Vx3SXVXw5O59BGTPYf0gq261Nx1HKTCHQs@z> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 12:47 PM, John Johansen wrote: > On 10/02/2018 12:17 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >> I could define CONFIG_LSM_ENABLE as being "additive" to >> SECURITY_APPARMOR_BOOTPARAM_VALUE and >> SECURITY_SELINUX_BOOTPARAM_VALUE? > > Oh sure lets deal with my complaint about too many ways to configure > this beast by adding yet another config option :P This is what v3 already does: SEC...BOOTPARAM_VALUE trumps ...LSM_ENABLE. > seriously though, please no. That just adds another layer of confusion > even if it is only being foisted on the distro/builder You've already sent a patch removing SECURITY_APPARMOR_BOOTPARAM_VALUE. If SELinux is fine to do that too, then I think we'll be sorted out. I'll just need to make "lsm.enable=" be an explicit list. (Do you have a problem with "lsm.disable=..." ?) -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security