linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 23/28] security: Introduce LSM_ORDER

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]

Date:   Wed, 08 Mar 2023 08:13:27 -0500
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, chuck.lever@...cle.com,
        jlayton@...nel.org, dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, paul@...l-moore.com,
        jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
        jarkko@...nel.org, stephen.smalley.work@...il.com,
        eparis@...isplace.org, casey@...aufler-ca.com, brauner@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        selinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stefanb@...ux.ibm.com, Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/28] security: Introduce LSM_ORDER_LAST

Hi Roberto,

On Fri, 2023-03-03 at 19:25 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> 
> Introduce LSM_ORDER_LAST, to satisfy the requirement of LSMs willing to be
> the last, e.g. the 'integrity' LSM, without changing the kernel command
> line or configuration.

Please reframe this as a bug fix for 79f7865d844c ("LSM: Introduce
"lsm=" for boottime LSM selection") and upstream it first, with
'integrity' as the last LSM.   The original bug fix commit 92063f3ca73a
("integrity: double check iint_cache was initialized") could then be
removed.

> 
> As for LSM_ORDER_FIRST, LSMs with LSM_ORDER_LAST are always enabled and put
> at the end of the LSM list in no particular order.

^Similar to LSM_ORDER_FIRST ...

And remove "in no particular order".

> 
> Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/lsm_hooks.h |  1 +
>  security/security.c       | 12 +++++++++---
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> index 21a8ce23108..05c4b831d99 100644
> --- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> +++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ extern void security_add_hooks(struct security_hook_list *hooks, int count,
>  enum lsm_order {
>  	LSM_ORDER_FIRST = -1,	/* This is only for capabilities. */
>  	LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE = 0,
> +	LSM_ORDER_LAST = 1,
>  };
>  
>  struct lsm_info {
> diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> index 322090a50cd..24f52ba3218 100644
> --- a/security/security.c
> +++ b/security/security.c
> @@ -284,9 +284,9 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_parse(const char *order, const char *origin)
>  		bool found = false;
>  
>  		for (lsm = __start_lsm_info; lsm < __end_lsm_info; lsm++) {
> -			if (lsm->order == LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE &&
> -			    strcmp(lsm->name, name) == 0) {
> -				append_ordered_lsm(lsm, origin);
> +			if (strcmp(lsm->name, name) == 0) {
> +				if (lsm->order == LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE)
> +					append_ordered_lsm(lsm, origin);
>  				found = true;
>  			}
>  		}
> @@ -306,6 +306,12 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_parse(const char *order, const char *origin)
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> +	/* LSM_ORDER_LAST is always last. */
> +	for (lsm = __start_lsm_info; lsm < __end_lsm_info; lsm++) {
> +		if (lsm->order == LSM_ORDER_LAST)
> +			append_ordered_lsm(lsm, "   last");
> +	}
> +
>  	/* Disable all LSMs not in the ordered list. */
>  	for (lsm = __start_lsm_info; lsm < __end_lsm_info; lsm++) {
>  		if (exists_ordered_lsm(lsm))

-- 
thanks,

Mimi