linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 0/9] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <50F05656.5060301@schaufler-ca.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:13:42 -0800
From:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	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>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 0/9] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

On 1/10/2013 4:46 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com> writes:
>
>> On 01/09/2013 05:28 AM, James Morris wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Jan 2013, John Johansen wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I'd say we need to see the actual use-case for Smack and Apparmor being 
>>>>> used together, along with at least one major distro committing to support 
>>>>> this.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ubuntu is very interested in stacking
>>> Which modules?
>>>
>> Well Yama which has now been special cased, and in the past there has been
>> discussion about other special case LSMs like case is proposing for module
>> loading. There has been interest around both selinux + apparmor and
>> smack + apparmor. I am not sure of all of the use cases that have lead to
>> such question but some of them have been around containers, with say
>> selinux on the host and apparmor in the container, or visa versa.
> 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.

Would that be per-container LSM lists? I hadn't thought about
doing that, and don't know how you might implement it, but I
suppose it could work.

>
> 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/