[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e20bf21e-77b0-6403-51b6-3f174d45529e@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 06:10:14 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
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 2019/03/22 1:38, Kees Cook wrote:
> This is mostly good. I'd like to keep the other LSMs listed though
> (similar to what I had originally) so that if a legacy-major doesn't
> initialize, later ones will be. I want to remove the concept of
> "major" LSMs. The only thing that should matter is init order...
Excuse me? Are you saying that
if a legacy-major (which is defined as the "Default security module")
doesn't initialize, later ones (any of selinux,smack,tomoyo,apparmor
except the one which is defined as "Default security module") will be
initialized
? That sounds strange to me. Any of selinux,smack,tomoyo,apparmor can be
initialized when specified by lsm= kernel command line option (or security=
kernel command line option if lsm= kernel command line option is not
specified), won't it?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists