[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhS2oU=YpoWjxAxWJqerQVTE3qcG4qfU7NSTNfqQ=wkW-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 15:15:47 -0400
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc: LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
LKLM <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] LSM: Add context interface for proc attrs
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH v4 3/3] LSM: Add context interface for proc attrs
>
> The /proc/.../attr/current interface is used by all three
> Linux security modules (SELinux, Smack and AppArmor) to
> report and modify the process security attribute. This is
> all fine when there is exactly one of these modules active
> and the userspace code knows which it module it is.
> It would require a major change to the "current" interface
> to provide information about more than one set of process
> security attributes. Instead, a "context" attribute is
> added, which identifies the security module that the
> information applies to. The format is:
>
> lsmname='context-value'
>
> When multiple concurrent modules are supported the
> /proc/.../attr/context interface will include the data
> for all of the active modules.
>
> lsmname1='context-value1'lsmname2='context-value2'
>
> The module specific subdirectories under attr contain context
> entries that report the information for that specific module
> in the same format.
I think a delimiter between the different LSMs would be a good idea.
A comma seems like a safe choice at the moment.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists