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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 6B4B5C742A5 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 05:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4440521019 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 05:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725856AbfGLFOx (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jul 2019 01:14:53 -0400 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:53526 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725807AbfGLFOx (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jul 2019 01:14:53 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Jul 2019 22:14:52 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,481,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="189734191" Received: from gonegri-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.252.48.192]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Jul 2019 22:14:50 -0700 Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 08:14:49 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: James Morris Cc: linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Some LSM and SGX remarks before parting of for two weeks Message-ID: <20190712051449.sywsnncepdasxjbi@linux.intel.com> References: <20190712021055.22qijpsahsy3gpmp@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 01:12:23PM +1000, James Morris wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jul 2019, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > Before going to a two week vacation (sending v21 today), I'll make some > > remarks on SGX and LSM's: > > > > 1. Currently all patch sets proposing LSM changes are missing a problem > > statement and describe a solution to an undescribed problem. > > 2. When speaking of SELinux I haven't seen any draft's on how would > > define a policy module with the new constructs. Does not have to > > be a full policy modules but more like snippets demosntrating that > > "this would work". > > 3. All the SELinux discussion is centered on type based policies. > > Potentially one could isolate enclaves with some UBAC or RBAC > > based model. That could be good first step and might not even > > require LSM changes. > > Unless I misunderstand what you mean here, RBAC and UBAC in SELinux still > require LSM hooks, and are typically integrated with Type Enforcement. OK, I was thinking something like with normal DAC just to have SGID for enclaves. Just learning basic SELinux concepts. Still quite alien world to me. /Jarkko