From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.1-rc2
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:05:14 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea75aace-a493-b2fa-1fef-d6ae76085c39@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jL0YzgQR_p9otyOX4+00a0i7Tfv9aLqauZFZs4-Kfjakg@mail.gmail.com>
On 2019/03/28 6:43, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> I don't see problems for an exclusive LSM user (AA, SELinux, Smack)
>>> also initializing TOMOYO, though. It should be a no-op. Is there some
>>> situation where this is not true?
>>
>> There should be no problem except some TOMOYO messages are printed.
>
> Okay, so I should send my latest version of the patch to James? Or do
> you explicitly want TOMOYO removed from all the CONFIG_LSM default
> lines except when selected by CONFIG_DEFAULT_SECURITY_TOMOYO? (I worry
> the latter will lead to less testing of the stacking.)
>
My approach is "opt-in" while your approach is "opt-out". And the problem
here is that people might fail to change CONFIG_LSM from the default value
to what they need. (And Jakub did not change CONFIG_LSM to reflect
CONFIG_DEFAULT_SECURITY_APPARMOR from the old config.) Thus, I suggest
"opt-in" approach; which includes up to only one legacy major LSM and allows
people to change the default value to include multiple legacy major LSMs.
You can propose your latest version. If SELinux/Smack/AppArmor people
prefer "opt-out" approach, I'm fine with "opt-out" approach.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-27 22:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-24 21:26 Linux 5.1-rc2 Linus Torvalds
2019-03-25 2:31 ` Randy Dunlap
2019-03-25 19:08 ` James Morris
2019-03-25 21:05 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-03-27 19:16 ` Kees Cook
2019-03-27 20:30 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-03-27 20:45 ` Kees Cook
2019-03-27 21:05 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-03-27 21:43 ` Kees Cook
2019-03-27 22:05 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2019-03-27 22:23 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-03-27 22:55 ` Randy Dunlap
2019-03-27 23:22 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-03-29 18:07 ` James Morris
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=ea75aace-a493-b2fa-1fef-d6ae76085c39@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).