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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E66CE7A8B for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 01:32:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230360AbjIYBcR (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2023 21:32:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50530 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229561AbjIYBcQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2023 21:32:16 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82D84BD for ; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 18:32:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1c3f97f2239so48393525ad.0 for ; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 18:32:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; t=1695605530; x=1696210330; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=t421teeWfsLYuWefWnb6yYiHbVNYi0Xr91E0o6nFyPY=; b=VxdpKuCt8ET1lyID1TTMw4eYMhZvF6JQObwHuk+Q5cHCgZdOGaLhFUEXxn54mBNu6/ F+BnxD3zIUmeulv0Lmsy3y/+qrDKBUAEMSsO5xOjNOjG5VfOOIwc5A4YrKcFE7CQA9Zb 7w6SxAvNVHnX5H9db/LOpJ4rxi8tJZX+JnA1M= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1695605530; x=1696210330; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=t421teeWfsLYuWefWnb6yYiHbVNYi0Xr91E0o6nFyPY=; b=rTiQOKWF9dolYUDWecbGkmrtCJQYCCewJIBO/vQ1UFdAYzrNpr8tBFepUn2dUHGRP7 3zcnVUy/0V1tSmYX2JAk521HB0SwfS7RVMAZESLpREQ/dYAZoR84cJuoMI9EdTRtfQQK etuGeSMECbHS8Gi+0k3DRX2raYYM3KjGPrZtaNa5l+PppiPm1NyrlBsZw7mnH1yIPvXe eMJvSx2LD04AODRtvJnPl6ca6V7zEHa9yEOCh1RCMPsuQoviz1TPZWm3D7n0DSNfEkt/ yLH7WZqI+Ew9AvpOm/Wz/hhef/LmRiPZPook9T1KqP9eGOOZO9CJ1KnK+jB63rCrfcU3 3z9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyGMEpeaim3zh/lrA7iNiOMvzJ9QOrAlcw0Dt04sK2k0sKEY1Yn cNZF+Sdk9SvQ7BHYwmqPaNavlGYCOxPoSgpikZE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG9jDl0J5CtblmiFw0dieeTUSdJ67ky6Bdvv9hT/cioU44PIxosx6uo8QOLD5gb18M1RV2uSg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ab5b:b0:1c4:67ae:9431 with SMTP id ij27-20020a170902ab5b00b001c467ae9431mr6475379plb.57.1695605529880; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 18:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (198-0-35-241-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [198.0.35.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m18-20020a170902db1200b001b9f7bc3e77sm7476893plx.189.2023.09.24.18.32.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 24 Sep 2023 18:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2023 18:32:08 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Tetsuo Handa Cc: Paul Moore , Casey Schaufler , Kees Cook , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: ANN: new LSM guidelines Message-ID: <202309241827.6818149EC8@keescook> References: <43d84d6c-18ac-6689-cddc-d079cfa19d4d@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <8912fc96-cb8e-ec3b-273d-6bd8ad6b5513@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <8912fc96-cb8e-ec3b-273d-6bd8ad6b5513@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 09:55:47AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2023/09/13 4:00, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 2:40 PM Casey Schaufler wrote: > >> On 9/12/2023 11:08 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > >>> > >>> Once again, we've already discussed this many, many times: out-of-tree > >>> LSMs are not the priority and that is not going to change. One > >>> corollary of this is that we are not going to assign LSM IDs to LSMs > >>> that remain out-of-tree as this would negatively impact the LSM layer > >>> by cluttering/depleting the LSM ID space. > > Like Kees Cook said, we don't need to worry about depleting the LSM ID space > because lsm_id::id is a u64. We only need to worry about cluttering/conflicting > the values. Right, this will go one of two ways: 1) author: "Hello, here is a new LSM I'd like to upstream, here it is. I assigned it the next LSM ID." maintainer(s): "Okay, sounds good. *review*" 2) author: "Hello, here is an LSM that has been in active use at $Place, and we have $Xxx many userspace applications that we cannot easily rebuild. We used LSM ID $Value that is far away from the sequential list of LSM IDs, and we'd really prefer to keep that assignment." maintainer(s): "Okay, sounds good. *review*" No problems detected. -Kees -- Kees Cook