linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] Wire up the lsm_manage

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: <470689f0-223e-4d26-a919-8d48f383883b@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 07:04:46 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Maxime Bélair <maxime.belair@...onical.com>,
        Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, john.johansen@...onical.com,
        paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
        mic@...ikod.net, kees@...nel.org, stephen.smalley.work@...il.com,
        casey@...aufler-ca.com, takedakn@...data.co.jp,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, apparmor@...ts.ubuntu.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Wire up the lsm_manage_policy syscall

On 2025/05/08 0:37, Maxime Bélair wrote:
> Again, each module decides which operations to expose through this syscall. In many cases
> the operation will still require CAP_SYS_ADMIN or a similar capability, so environments
> that choose this interface remain secure while gaining its advantages.

If the interpretation of "flags" argument varies across LSMs, it sounds like ioctl()'s
"cmd" argument. Also, there is prctl() which can already carry string-ish parameters
without involving open(). Why can't we use prctl() instead of lsm_manage_policy() ?