linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v14 3/6] LSM: Explicit individual LSM associations

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: <51FADDE4.8080805@schaufler-ca.com>
Date:	Thu, 01 Aug 2013 15:15:00 -0700
From:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:	Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
CC:	LKLM <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	SE Linux <selinux@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 3/6] LSM: Explicit individual LSM associations

On 8/1/2013 2:30 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thursday, August 01, 2013 11:52:14 AM Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 8/1/2013 11:35 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> Okay, so if I understand everything correctly, there are no new entries in
>>> /proc relating specifically to NetLabel, XFRM, or Secmark; although there
>>> are new LSM specific entries for the general /proc entries that exist
>>> now.  Yes?
>> That's correct.
>>
>> There is /sys/kernel/security/present, which tells you which LSM is going to
>> show up in /proc/.../attr/current.
>>
>> Should we have /sys/kernel/security/XFRM, /sys/kernel/security/secmark,
>> /sys/kernel/security/NetLabel and /sys/kernel/security/SO_PEERCRED?
> Maybe.
>
> While they might be helpful, I'm not 100% certain they are needed and further 
> I'm not sure they are the "right" solution at this point.  Any thoughts, both 
> for and against, are welcome.
>
What might be a more correct solution? Assuming, of course, that there's
a real problem.


--
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/