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=-2.5 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 3ED06C468AB for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2019 05:04:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A0B216B7 for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2019 05:04:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725934AbfGFFEf (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Jul 2019 01:04:35 -0400 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:36387 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725909AbfGFFEf (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Jul 2019 01:04:35 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jul 2019 22:04:34 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,457,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="155403210" Received: from bxing-desk.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [134.134.148.187]) ([134.134.148.187]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Jul 2019 22:04:34 -0700 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] security/x86/sgx: SGX specific LSM hooks To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org, casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org, luto@kernel.org, jethro@fortanix.com, greg@enjellic.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com References: <20190619222401.14942-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <20190703231650.bhnkn34ccrzdwwhz@linux.intel.com> From: "Xing, Cedric" Message-ID: <415f8ae7-93d4-129e-4169-ffc7059398e5@intel.com> Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2019 22:04:31 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190703231650.bhnkn34ccrzdwwhz@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: selinux-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: selinux@vger.kernel.org On 7/3/2019 4:16 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:56:18AM -0700, Cedric Xing wrote: > > I think it is fine to have these patch sets as a discussion starters but > it does not make any sense to me to upstream LSM changes with the SGX > foundations. Guess LSM is a gating factor, because otherwise SGX could be abused to make executable EPC from pages that are otherwise not allowed to be executable. Am I missing anything? > > This is exactly the same situation as with KVM changes. The patch set is > already way too big to fit to the standards [1]. > > The eye should be on whether the uapi (e.g. device files, ioctl's) will > work for LSM's in a legit way. Do we need more of these different > flavors of experimental LSM changes or can we make some conclusions with > the real issue we are trying to deal with? > > [1] "Do not send more than 15 patches at once to the vger mailing lists!!!" > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.17/process/submitting-patches.html#select-the-recipients-for-your-patch > > /Jarkko >