[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bee1a774-461a-2535-a640-bbe65291e909@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 18:02:31 -0700
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
"open list:NFS, SUNRPC, AND..." <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: mount.nfs: Protocol error after upgrade to linux/master
On 3/16/2019 1:08 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/03/16 14:38, Kees Cook wrote:
>> config LSM
>> string "Ordered list of enabled LSMs"
>> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,smack,selinux,tomoyo,apparmor" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_SMACK
>> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,tomoyo,selinux,smack,apparmor" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_TOMOYO
>> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,apparmor,selinux,smack,tomoyo" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_APPARMOR
>> default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,selinux,smack,tomoyo,apparmor"
>> help
>> A comma-separated list of LSMs, in initialization order.
>>
>> (I don't see a way to include an earlier config string in a new
>> default.) Thoughts?
>>
> Hmm, DEFAULT_SECURITY_TOMOYO no longer works because TOMOYO will be
> always enabled as long as CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO=y. Maybe
>
> config LSM
> string "Ordered list of enabled LSMs"
> - default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,selinux,smack,tomoyo,apparmor"
> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,selinux" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_SELINUX
> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,smack" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_SMACK
> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,tomoyo" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_TOMOYO
> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,apparmor" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_APPARMOR
> + default "yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity" if DEFAULT_SECURITY_DAC
> help
> A comma-separated list of LSMs, in initialization order.
>
> (i.e. include only up to one major LSM as default choice, and allow manually including
> multiple major LSMs at both kernel build time and kernel boot time) is better?
I think this looks pretty good.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists