From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-yw1-f65.google.com ([209.85.161.65]:37135 "EHLO
        mail-yw1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1727271AbeJCEXe (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 3 Oct 2018 00:23:34 -0400
Received: by mail-yw1-f65.google.com with SMTP id y14-v6so1430726ywa.4
        for <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 14:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-f176.google.com (mail-yb1-f176.google.com. [209.85.219.176])
        by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f194-v6sm8705188ywb.53.2018.10.02.14.38.07
        for <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
        (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Tue, 02 Oct 2018 14:38:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-f176.google.com with SMTP id e16-v6so1445046ybk.8
        for <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 14:38:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1810030719040.23596@namei.org>
References: <20181002005505.6112-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20181002005505.6112-11-keescook@chromium.org>
 <alpine.LRH.2.21.1810030719040.23596@namei.org>
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 14:38:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJRFv_e7_-hAnuuEoC90JPXG2aTaHJ98_UaoS_4R1mYtg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH security-next v4 10/32] LSM: Don't ignore initialization failures
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-arch.vger.kernel.org>
To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>, John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>, Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>, "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@intel.com>, LSM <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Message-ID: <20181002213805.M1GluLNDLgZXGkHlzTFO-UMuQQnnvRP305UgHl41OQc@z>

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:20 PM, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
>
>> LSM initialization failures have traditionally been ignored. We should
>> at least WARN when something goes wrong.
>
> I guess we could have a boot param which specifies what to do if any LSM
> fails to init, as I think some folks will want to stop execution at that
> point.
>
> Thoughts?

I'm not opposed, but I won't author it because Linus will yell at me
about introducing a "machine killing" option.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security