linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] lsm,io_uring: add LSM hooks for io_uring

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHC9VhSFH2aYoBqcCcamApHpU=YHbabkQEKriBDBLjP08gYV6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 12:15:33 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc: Hamza Mahfooz <hamzamahfooz@...ux.microsoft.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, 
	Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>, 
	Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>, Bram Bonné <brambonne@...gle.com>, 
	Thiébaud Weksteen <tweek@...gle.com>, 
	Christian Göttsche <cgzones@...glemail.com>, 
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, 
	io-uring@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] lsm,io_uring: add LSM hooks for io_uring_setup()

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 7:02 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
>
> I can't say I agree that it's an access control because although it is
> specific to a process it isn't specific to an object. You can still access
> the set of objects using other means. It is a mechanism control, preventing
> use of io_uring entirely.

I see your argument and raise you "capabilities".

Granted, we could have a fairly lively debate about the merits of
capabilities, which I'm not encouraging here, I'm only mentioning it
as a counterpoint and evidence that there is precedent for things like
this as "access control".

> I'm much more concerned about bugs in io_uring than in xyzzy. The io_uring
> people have been pretty good about addressing LSM issues, so it's not
> a huge deal, but I never like seeing switches to turn off features because
> security is active.
>
> If no one else shares my concern you can put my comments down to the
> ravings of the lunatic fringe and ignore them.

Fair enough.  FWIW, I appreciate the discussion, even if we didn't
quite reach consensus this time around.

-- 
paul-moore.com