[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87d2xcsesh.fsf@xmission.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:13:02 -0800
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
LKLM <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
SE Linux <selinux@...ho.nsa.gov>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 0/9] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs
John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com> writes:
>> When a distro is run in a container it is desirable to be able to run
>> the distro's security policy in that container. Ideally this will get
>> addressed by being able to do some level of per user namespace stacking.
>> Say selinux outside and apparmor inside a container.
>>
>> I think this would take a little more work than what Casey has currently
>> devised but I am hopeful an additional layer of stacking can be added
>> after Casey has merged the basic layer of stacking.
>>
> Right the general case will take more, but doing things like selinux on
> the outside and apparmor inside are doable right now. And we are working
> on supporting stacked apparmor policy right now so apparmor outside and
> a different apparmor policy inside will be doable soon.
Cool. For stacked apparmor how are you deciding which tasks get which
policy? Is this based on user namespaces or something else?
Eric
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists