Linux-Security-Module Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Steve Grubb <>
To: Casey Schaufler <>
Cc: "" <>,
	Linux Security Module list 
	Paul Moore <>,
Subject: Re: Preferred subj= with multiple LSMs
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 11:08:41 -0400
Message-ID: <2268017.8MBUnBNn7u@x2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>


On Friday, July 12, 2019 12:33:55 PM EDT Casey Schaufler wrote:
> Which of these options would be preferred for audit records
> when there are multiple active security modules?

I'd like to start out with what is the underlying problem that results in 
this? For example, we have pam. It has multiple modules each having a vote. 
If a module votes no, then we need to know who voted no and maybe why. We 
normally do not need to know who voted yes.

So, in a stacked situation, shouldn't each module make its own event, if 
required, just like pam? And then log the attributes as it knows them? Also, 
what model is being used? Does first module voting no end access voting? Or 
does each module get a vote even if one has already said no?

Also, we try to keep LSM subsystems separated by record type numbers. So, 
apparmour and selinux events are entirely different record numbers and 
formats. Combining everything into one record is going to be problematic for 


> I'm not asking
> if we should do it, I'm asking which of these options I should
> implement when I do do it. I've prototyped #1 and #2. #4 is a
> minor variant of #1 that is either better for compatibility or
> worse, depending on how you want to look at it. I understand
> that each of these offer challenges. If I've missed something
> obvious, I'd be delighted to consider #5.
> Thank you.
> Option 1:
> 	subj=selinux='x:y:z:s:c',apparmor='a'
> Option 2:
> 	subj=x:y:z:s:c subj=a
> Option 3:
> 	lsms=selinux,apparmor subj=x:y:z:s:c subj=a
> Option 4:
> 	subjs=selinux='x:y:z:s:c',apparmor='a'
> Option 5:
> 	Something else.

  reply index

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-12 16:33 Casey Schaufler
     [not found] ` <>
2019-07-13 15:08 ` Steve Grubb [this message]
2019-07-15 19:04   ` Richard Guy Briggs
     [not found] ` <1979804.kRvuSoDnao@x2>
     [not found]   ` <>
     [not found]     ` <3577098.oGDFHdoSSQ@x2>
2019-07-16 17:16       ` Casey Schaufler
     [not found]   ` <>
2019-07-16 17:29     ` Casey Schaufler
2019-07-16 17:43       ` Paul Moore
2019-07-16 17:58         ` Casey Schaufler
2019-07-16 18:06         ` Steve Grubb
2019-07-16 18:41           ` Casey Schaufler

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2268017.8MBUnBNn7u@x2 \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-Security-Module Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror linux-security-module/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-security-module linux-security-module/ \
	public-inbox-index linux-security-module

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone public-inbox