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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS 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 64062C0044C for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:14:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D98320862 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:14:21 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1D98320862 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728718AbeKEXeP (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2018 18:34:15 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:51430 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729031AbeKEXeP (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2018 18:34:15 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id wA5E9GKI015116 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 09:14:19 -0500 Received: from e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.97]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2njpkvu0e0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 05 Nov 2018 09:14:18 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:14:16 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.195) by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.131) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:14:12 -0000 Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.232]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id wA5EEBVa62390284 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:14:11 GMT Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AFF752050; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:14:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.105.137]) by d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9283352052; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:14:09 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH security-next v5 12/30] LSM: Provide separate ordered initialization From: Mimi Zohar To: Kees Cook Cc: James Morris , Casey Schaufler , John Johansen , Stephen Smalley , Paul Moore , Tetsuo Handa , Mimi Zohar , Randy Dunlap , Jordan Glover , LSM , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-arch , LKML Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 09:13:58 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <20181011001846.30964-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20181011001846.30964-13-keescook@chromium.org> <1541182406.20901.31.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18110514-4275-0000-0000-000002D9A880 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18110514-4276-0000-0000-000037E6C052 Message-Id: <1541427238.21115.58.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-11-05_08:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=893 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1811050130 Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, 2018-11-02 at 13:49 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > I don't recall why "integrity" is on the security_initcall, while both > > IMA and EVM are on the late_initcall(). > > It's because integrity needs to have a VFS buffer allocated extremely > early, so it used the security init to do it. While it's not an LSM, > it does use this part of LSM infrastructure. I didn't see an obvious > alternative at the time, but now that I think about it, maybe just a > simple postcore_initcall() would work? I was questioning why the "security_initcall", which is called after the late_initcall.  Moving it to the postcore_initcall, before the late_initcall, sounds right. Mimi