[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c508ead6-67c3-6e84-367b-e266d49306f7@huawei-partners.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 18:30:59 +0300
From: Mikhail Ivanov <ivanov.mikhail1@...wei-partners.com>
To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>, Paul Moore
<paul@...l-moore.com>
CC: <gnoack@...gle.com>, <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
<matthieu@...fet.re>, <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
<yusongping@...wei.com>, <artem.kuzin@...wei.com>,
<konstantin.meskhidze@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 7/8] landlock: Add note about errors consistency in
documentation
On 12/10/2024 9:08 PM, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 07:04:53PM +0800, Mikhail Ivanov wrote:
>> Add recommendation to specify Landlock first in CONFIG_LSM list, so user
>> can have better LSM errors consistency provided by Landlock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mikhail Ivanov <ivanov.mikhail1@...wei-partners.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
>> index bb7480a05e2c..0db5eee9bffa 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
>> @@ -610,7 +610,8 @@ time as the other security modules. The list of security modules enabled by
>> default is set with ``CONFIG_LSM``. The kernel configuration should then
>> contains ``CONFIG_LSM=landlock,[...]`` with ``[...]`` as the list of other
>> potentially useful security modules for the running system (see the
>> -``CONFIG_LSM`` help).
>> +``CONFIG_LSM`` help). It is recommended to specify Landlock first of all other
>> +modules in CONFIG_LSM list since it provides better errors consistency.
>
> This is partially correct because Landlock may not block anything
> whereas another LSM could deny a network action, with potentially a
> wrong error code. I don't think this patch is worth it, especially
> because other LSMs have bugs that should be fixed.
Ok, agreed
>
>>
>> Boot time configuration
>> -----------------------
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists