From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/24] Add the ability to lock down access to the running
 kernel image
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 19:57:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CALCETrUaSeTwwiTs7LwNTcScUcVok1_j-OBnEQqGXmst5T++Sg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <152346387861.4030.4408662483445703127.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <152346388583.4030.15146667041427303547.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <152346388583.4030.15146667041427303547.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>, Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 9:24 AM, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>  (*) CONFIG_LOCK_DOWN_KERNEL
>
>      This makes lockdown available and applies it to all the points that
>      need to be locked down if the mode is set.  Lockdown mode can be
>      enabled by providing:
>
>         lockdown=1

By doing this, you are basically committing to making the
protect-kernel-integrity vs protect-kernel-secrecy split be a
second-class citizen if it gets added.

How about lockdown=integrity_and_secrecy or lockdown=2 if you feel
like using numbers?