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 08:54:16 -0500
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ch.ncsc.mil>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v2)

Quoting Greg KH (greg@...ah.com):
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 08:41:21PM -0500, 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.
> 
> My main question was why was that file in the kernel/ directory?
> Shouldn't that also be in the security/ directory?

I'm using cgroups to track the tasks which should have their device
permissions restricted.  Right now cgroups are all under kernel/.

> And to be honest, I didn't really look at it at all other than the
> diffstat to make sure you weren't messing with the kobj_map stuff
> anymore :)
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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/