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=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 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 177A7C2D0A3 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA19920704 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="nZTLGtBy" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725800AbgJ3AcX (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:32:23 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:3822 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725372AbgJ3AcW (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:32:22 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 09U0VoVR006543; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:32:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : subject : from : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=yCu1W6Us4NJ9GuAgohY813aWiiXCnsRGcrSqKs3EhI4=; b=nZTLGtByaFbLodUY9l67uXk5pQRyEn7ehuW9/aaGRqOejq/yDHxuLdrxmltCfjwjQ7/g MaRHa/98vdZLV7nVT9qTTc5AwXMab1CGWZJJEiSMwoFF0OK8eqdZysP8mSVWHDdRw3nn 1O6dpaxMMKkUwnS0h5YNBZ0XXj0VLzG7/dVKh3J3Z0/HohdcI401MkDqvGQ/THRZjKg2 W58+eu45hs5prVXIYSHUZ8kni93dalWdfuuR2KLSmsYB4tTz2ZUfspyxL+EleRDSH433 po0dNaG6YLlnEy1J7sttehNpqghCwbuF+DdVWIPoxxgczmxJ34K6gMbk/QYHrnymWQ+z Ng== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 34g6sya7yd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:32:20 -0400 Received: from m0098393.ppops.net (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 09U0Vw6H006858; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:32:20 -0400 Received: from ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com (66.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.102]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 34g6sya7xt-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:32:20 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 09U0Gp27023837; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:17 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 34g41xr6hj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:17 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 09U0WF1A19005908 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:15 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F8014C046; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A51824C052; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-f45666cc-3089-11b2-a85c-c57d1a57929f.ibm.com (unknown [9.160.78.12]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 00:32:13 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] Finding the right target branch for patches that span IMA and SeLinux From: Mimi Zohar To: Tushar Sugandhi , stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com, paul@paul-moore.com Cc: SELinux , Tyler Hicks , Lakshmi Ramasubramanian , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:32:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <703ced1a-3a48-f29e-9141-af78415d8402@linux.microsoft.com> References: <703ced1a-3a48-f29e-9141-af78415d8402@linux.microsoft.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-12.el8) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312,18.0.737 definitions=2020-10-29_12:2020-10-29,2020-10-29 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2010290167 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2020-10-29 at 16:33 -0700, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: > Hello Mimi/Stephen/Paul, > > As you are already aware, we have several patch-sets in review for > IMA infrastructure for measurement of critical kernel data and it's > usage. > > [1] infrastructure for measurement of critical data patch-set: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-integrity/list/?series=354437 > > [2] Using [1] to measure SeLinux data: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11801585/ > > [3] Using [1] to measure dm-crypt data: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-integrity/list/?series=366903 > > [4] Using [1] to measure kernel_version: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11854625/ > > [5] built-in IMA policy rule to handle critical data before > a custom IMA policy is loaded: > {Patch is not yet sent for public review} > > Mimi has suggested that patch-set [1] should include a demonstrative > example use of the functionality in the same series. And that example > should be SeLinux (patch-set [2]). > > However, SeLinux patch-set [2] depends on the functionality in SeLinux > branch [7], which is not yet merged in Integrity branch [6]. > Therefore SeLinux patch-set [2] does not apply on the Integrity branch > at this time. > > Further, SeLinux patch-set [2] also depends on the new code for > critical data infrastructure (patch-set [1] and [5]) which is all > IMA code. Patch-set [1] and [5], even though all IMA code, applies > cleanly on SeLinux branch - along with patch-set [2]. > > For the above reason, the new series we are going to post, which > combines [1], [2], and [5], needs to be based on SeLinux branch. > > Since [1] and [5] contains IMA code - we wanted to confirm with the > maintainers if there are any concerns to base the series on SeLinux > branch. > > Thanks, > Tushar > > [6] Integrity Repo/Branch: > Repo: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/zohar/linux-integrity.git > Branch: linux-integrity > > [7] SeLinux Branch: > Repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pcmoore/selinux.git > Branch: next Unless this patch set is specifically dependent on the two patches in the SELinux tree beyond v5.10.0-rc1, please base it on v5.10.0-rc1. thanks, Mimi