[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhSWUNfFUZPtEQdHN4ON6VzWoRN38NeoHJHmGZj68NprYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2025 21:12:26 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc: Hamza Mahfooz <hamzamahfooz@...ux.microsoft.com>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>, Thiébaud Weksteen <tweek@...gle.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Bram Bonné <brambonne@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lsm,io_uring: add LSM hooks for io_uring_setup()
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 4:34 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
> On 12/19/2024 12:41 PM, Hamza Mahfooz wrote:
> > It is desirable to allow LSM to configure accessibility to io_uring.
>
> Why is it desirable to allow LSM to configure accessibility to io_uring?
Look at some of the existing access controls that some LSMs, including
Smack, have implemented to control access to certain parts of io_uring
such as credential sharing. While having a control point at the top
of io_uring_setup() is a fairly coarse way to restrict io_uring, the
advantage is that it is very simple.
--
paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists