From: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc: "Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"KP Singh" <kpsingh@chromium.org>,
"Casey Schaufler" <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
"Thomas Garnier" <thgarnie@chromium.org>,
"Michael Halcrow" <mhalcrow@google.com>,
"Paul Turner" <pjt@google.com>,
"Brendan Gregg" <brendan.d.gregg@gmail.com>,
"Jann Horn" <jannh@google.com>,
"Matthew Garrett" <mjg59@google.com>,
"Christian Brauner" <christian@brauner.io>,
"Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>,
"Florent Revest" <revest@chromium.org>,
"Brendan Jackman" <jackmanb@chromium.org>,
"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>,
"Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>, "Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
"Mauro Carvalho Chehab" <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Nicolas Ferre" <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
"Stanislav Fomichev" <sdf@google.com>,
"Quentin Monnet" <quentin.monnet@netronome.com>,
"Andrey Ignatov" <rdna@fb.com>, "Joe Stringer" <joe@wand.net.nz>,
"Paul Moore" <paul@paul-moore.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 00/13] MAC and Audit policy using eBPF (KRSI)
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 14:33:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e59607cc-1a84-cbdd-5117-7efec86b11ff@tycho.nsa.gov> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.2001090551000.27794@namei.org>
On 1/8/20 1:58 PM, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, Stephen Smalley wrote:
>
>> This appears to impose a very different standard to this eBPF-based LSM than
>> has been applied to the existing LSMs, e.g. we are required to preserve
>> SELinux policy compatibility all the way back to Linux 2.6.0 such that new
>> kernel with old policy does not break userspace. If that standard isn't being
>> applied to the eBPF-based LSM, it seems to inhibit its use in major Linux
>> distros, since otherwise users will in fact start experiencing breakage on the
>> first such incompatible change. Not arguing for or against, just trying to
>> make sure I understand correctly...
>
> A different standard would be applied here vs. a standard LSM like
> SELinux, which are retrofitted access control systems.
>
> I see KRSI as being more of a debugging / analytical API, rather than an
> access control system. You could of course build such a system with KRSI
> but it would need to provide a layer of abstraction for general purpose
> users.
>
> So yes this would be a special case, as its real value is in being a
> special case, i.e. dynamic security telemetry.
The cover letter subject line and the Kconfig help text refer to it as a
BPF-based "MAC and Audit policy". It has an enforce config option that
enables the bpf programs to deny access, providing access control. IIRC,
in the earlier discussion threads, the BPF maintainers suggested that
Smack and other LSMs could be entirely re-implemented via it in the
future, and that such an implementation would be more optimal.
Again, not arguing for or against, but wondering if people fully
understand the implications. If it ends up being useful, people will
build access control systems with it, and it directly exposes a lot of
kernel internals to userspace. There was a lot of concern originally
about the LSM hook interface becoming a stable ABI and/or about it being
misused. Exposing that interface along with every kernel data structure
exposed through it to userspace seems like a major leap. Even if the
mainline kernel doesn't worry about any kind of stable interface
guarantees for it, the distros might be forced to provide some kABI
guarantees for it to appease ISVs and users...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-08 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-20 15:41 [PATCH bpf-next v1 00/13] MAC and Audit policy using eBPF (KRSI) KP Singh
2019-12-20 15:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 01/13] bpf: Refactor BPF_EVENT context macros to its own header KP Singh
2019-12-20 20:10 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-20 20:26 ` KP Singh
2019-12-20 15:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 02/13] bpf: lsm: Add a skeleton and config options KP Singh
2020-01-07 21:13 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 15:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 03/13] bpf: lsm: Introduce types for eBPF based LSM KP Singh
2019-12-20 15:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 04/13] bpf: lsm: Allow btf_id based attachment for LSM hooks KP Singh
2019-12-23 23:54 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-30 19:22 ` KP Singh
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 05/13] tools/libbpf: Add support in libbpf for BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM KP Singh
2019-12-24 0:07 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-24 0:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-03 23:59 ` KP Singh
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 06/13] bpf: lsm: Init Hooks and create files in securityfs KP Singh
2019-12-24 6:28 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-30 15:37 ` KP Singh
2019-12-30 18:52 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-30 19:20 ` Kees Cook
2020-01-03 23:53 ` KP Singh
2020-01-07 21:22 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 07/13] bpf: lsm: Implement attach, detach and execution KP Singh
2019-12-24 5:48 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-07 21:27 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 08/13] bpf: lsm: Show attached program names in hook read handler KP Singh
2020-01-07 21:28 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 09/13] bpf: lsm: Add a helper function bpf_lsm_event_output KP Singh
2019-12-24 6:36 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-30 15:11 ` KP Singh
2019-12-30 18:56 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 10/13] bpf: lsm: Handle attachment of the same program KP Singh
2019-12-24 6:38 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-08 18:21 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 11/13] tools/libbpf: Add bpf_program__attach_lsm KP Singh
2019-12-24 6:44 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-08 18:24 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 12/13] bpf: lsm: Add selftests for BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM KP Singh
2019-12-24 6:49 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-04 0:09 ` KP Singh
2020-01-09 17:59 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-08 18:25 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 15:42 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 13/13] bpf: lsm: Add Documentation KP Singh
2019-12-20 17:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 00/13] MAC and Audit policy using eBPF (KRSI) Casey Schaufler
2019-12-20 17:38 ` KP Singh
2019-12-30 19:15 ` Kees Cook
2020-01-08 15:25 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-08 18:58 ` James Morris
2020-01-08 19:33 ` Stephen Smalley [this message]
2020-01-09 18:11 ` James Morris
2020-01-09 18:23 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-01-09 18:58 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-09 19:07 ` James Morris
2020-01-09 19:43 ` KP Singh
2020-01-09 19:47 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-10 15:27 ` KP Singh
2020-01-10 17:48 ` James Morris
2020-01-10 17:53 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-01-14 16:54 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-14 17:42 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-15 2:48 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-01-15 13:59 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-15 14:09 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-01-15 22:23 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-01-09 19:11 ` KP Singh
2020-01-08 18:27 ` James Morris
2019-12-20 22:46 ` Mickaël Salaün
2019-12-30 19:30 ` Kees Cook
2019-12-31 12:11 ` Mickaël Salaün
2019-12-22 1:27 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-12-30 14:58 ` KP Singh
2019-12-30 19:14 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-24 6:51 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-12-30 15:04 ` KP Singh
2019-12-30 18:58 ` Andrii Nakryiko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly 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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e59607cc-1a84-cbdd-5117-7efec86b11ff@tycho.nsa.gov \
--to=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brendan.d.gregg@gmail.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jackmanb@chromium.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=joe@wand.net.nz \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kpsingh@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab+samsung@kernel.org \
--cc=mhalcrow@google.com \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=mjg59@google.com \
--cc=nicolas.ferre@microchip.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=quentin.monnet@netronome.com \
--cc=rdna@fb.com \
--cc=revest@chromium.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=thgarnie@chromium.org \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).