linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] SELinux: Measure state and hash of policy using IMA

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: <07854807-c495-b7e5-fc44-26d78ff14f1b@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:49:44 -0700
From:   Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:     Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        tusharsu@...ux.microsoft.com, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        SElinux list <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SELinux: Measure state and hash of policy using IMA

On 8/24/20 3:18 PM, Paul Moore wrote:

Hi Paul,

>>>>> Is Ondrej's re-try approach I need to use to workaround policy reload issue?
>>>>
>>>> No, I think perhaps we should move the mutex to selinux_state instead
>>>> of selinux_fs_info.  selinux_fs_info has a pointer to selinux_state so
>>>> it can then use it indirectly.  Note that your patches are going to
>>>> conflict with other ongoing work in the selinux next branch that is
>>>> refactoring policy load and converting the policy rwlock to RCU.
>>>
>>> Yeah, and I'm experimenting with a patch on top of Stephen's RCU work
>>> that would allow you to do this in a straightforward way without even
>>> messing with the fsi->mutex. My patch may or may not be eventually
>>> committed, but either way I'd recommend holding off on this for a
>>> while until the dust settles around the RCU conversion.
>>
>> I can make the SELinux\IMA changes in "selinux next branch" taking
>> dependencies on Stephen's patches + relevant IMA patches.
> 
> I know it can be frustrating to hear what I'm about to say, but the
> best option is probably just to wait a little to let things settle in
> the SELinux -next branch.  There is a lot of stuff going on right now
> with patches flooding in (at least "flooding" from a SELinux kernel
> development perspective) and we/I've haven't gotten through all of
> them yet.
> 

Could you please let me know when the current set of changes in SELinux 
next branch would be completed and be ready to take new changes?

I mean, roughly - would it be a month from now or you expect that to 
take longer?

thanks,
  -lakshmi