linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH security-next v4 23/32] selinux: Remove boot parameter

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:   Wed, 3 Oct 2018 17:03:53 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@...el.com>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH security-next v4 23/32] selinux: Remove boot parameter

On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
> To me, "security=selinux" means SELinux and nothing else, so I think that
> all of these params are inviting a lot of confusion.
>
> Sorry, I don't have a good answer for this.

This part, at least, has a pretty clear solution. :) The consensus is
to limit "security=" to what have been considered the "major" LSMs" so
it'll work in spirit the way it was designed. The goal of the new
options, though, is to find something that'll fit all the ways LSMs
are getting used: the majors, the minors, and the coming "medium"
LSMs. The precedent is pretty good here, since "security=" already
ignores the minor LSMs: Yama and LoadPin. So it'll just control the
enable/disable of the "major" LSMs, who will carry an internal marking
indicating that they're mediated by "security=" (and no new LSMs would
get this marking).

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security