linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v2)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:28:19 +0300
From:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
CC:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ch.ncsc.mil>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v2)

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting James Morris (jmorris@...ei.org):
>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>
>>> Quoting James Morris (jmorris@...ei.org):
>>>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> True, but while this change simplifies the code a bit, the semantics
>>>>> seem more muddled - devcg will be enforcing when CONFIG_CGROUP_DEV=y
>>>>> and:
>>>>>
>>>>> 	SECURITY=n or
>>>>> 	rootplug is enabled
>>>>> 	capabilities is enabled
>>>>> 	smack is enabled
>>>>> 	selinux+capabilities is enabled
>>>> Well, this is how real systems are going to be deployed.
>>> Sorry, do you mean with capabilities?
>> Yes.
>>
>> All Fedora, RHEL, CentOS etc. ship with SELinux+capabilities.  I can't 
>> imagine not enabling them on other kernels.
>>
>>>> It becomes confusing, IMHO, if you have to change which secondary LSM you 
>>>> stack with SELinux to enable a cgroup feature.
>>> So you're saying selinux without capabilities should still be able to
>>> use dev_cgroup?  (Just making sure I understand right)
>> Nope, SELinux always stacks with capabilities, so havng the cgroup hooks 
>> in capabilities makes sense (rather than having us change the secondary 
>> stacking LSM just to enable a feature).
> 
> Oh, ok.
> 
> Will let the patch stand until Pavel and Greg comment then.

Well, I saw your previous patch, that was implemented as just another
LSM module and I liked it except for the LSM dependency.

Since this version can happily work w/o LSM, I like it too :)

> thanks,
> -serge
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/