From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DDAC31E51 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 13:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF6C2084B for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 13:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726047AbfFRNz0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2019 09:55:26 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:52563 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725970AbfFRNz0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2019 09:55:26 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jun 2019 06:55:26 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,389,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="334865192" Received: from sjchrist-coffee.jf.intel.com (HELO linux.intel.com) ([10.54.74.36]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2019 06:55:26 -0700 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 06:55:26 -0700 From: Sean Christopherson To: Stephen Smalley Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen , linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , Cedric Xing , Andy Lutomirski , Jethro Beekman , "Dr . Greg Wettstein" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3 Message-ID: <20190618135525.GA13781@linux.intel.com> References: <20190617222438.2080-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <05bcc1e2-0bd7-dcb9-02c3-969f4484a5fc@tycho.nsa.gov> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <05bcc1e2-0bd7-dcb9-02c3-969f4484a5fc@tycho.nsa.gov> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-sgx-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:38:19AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On 6/17/19 6:24 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote: > >My original plan was for my next RFC to be an implementation of Andy's > >proposed "dynamic tracking" model. I actually finished the tracking > >portion, but was completely flummoxed by the auditing[1]. Since Cedric's > >RFC is essentially a variation of the dynamic tracking model, it too has > >the same auditing complexities. End result, I ended back at the "make > >userspace state its intentions" approach. > > > >Except for patch 12 (see below), the SGX changes have been fully tested, > >including updating the kernel's selftest as well as my own fork of (an old > >version of) Intel's SDK to use the new UAPI. The LSM changes have been > >smoke tested, but I haven't actually configured AppArmor or SELinux to > >verify the permissions work as intended. > > Was dropping linux-security-module and selinux lists intentional for this > RFC? Not recommended. Yes, my thought was to keep the noise to the sgx list until we at least agree on a direction for the SGX UAPI. I am fully expecting that whatever LSM and SELinux patches we end up with will go through a lot more scrutiny when Jarkko sends them with his SGX series. Anyways, would you like me to resend the series to Cc the aforementioned lists? > Is the entire series aside from patch 12 available in a public tree > somewhere? I pushed tag 'sgx-lsm-v3' to https://github.com/sean-jc/linux.git. > Ultimately we'll want additions to the selinux-testsuite that exercise each > of the new permissions, both a permission denied scenario and a permission > allowed scenario.