From: zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Mimi Zohar)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 8/8] module: replace the existing LSM hook in init_module
Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 19:14:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1527635645.3534.39.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhQL+CsqKL83fSZhjEZVSjKKfmLULvehXZ8SZhtK5xzLMQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 2018-05-29 at 18:39 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -4043,6 +4037,25 @@ static int selinux_kernel_module_from_file(struct file *file)
> > SYSTEM__MODULE_LOAD, &ad);
> > }
> >
> > +static int selinux_kernel_load_data(enum kernel_load_data_id id)
> > +{
> > + u32 sid;
> > + int rc = 0;
> > +
> > + switch (id) {
> > + case LOADING_MODULE:
> > + sid = current_sid();
> > +
> > + /* init_module */
> > + return avc_has_perm(&selinux_state, sid, sid, SECCLASS_SYSTEM,
> > + SYSTEM__MODULE_LOAD, NULL);
> > + default:
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return rc;
> > +}
>
> I'm not a fan of the duplication here. If we must have a new LSM hook
> for this, can we at least have it call
> selinux_kernel_module_from_file() so we have all the kernel module
> loading logic/controls in one function? Yes, I understand there are
> differences between init_module() and finit_module() but I like
> handling them both in one function as we do today.
There's some disagreement as to whether we really need two LSM hooks.
?This sounds like you would prefer a single LSM hook, not the two that
this patch set introduces.
We need to come to some consensus. ?(Comments appreciated in 0/8.)
Mimi
>
> > static int selinux_kernel_read_file(struct file *file,
> > enum kernel_read_file_id id)
> > {
> > @@ -6950,6 +6963,7 @@ static struct security_hook_list selinux_hooks[] __lsm_ro_after_init = {
> > LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_act_as, selinux_kernel_act_as),
> > LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_create_files_as, selinux_kernel_create_files_as),
> > LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_module_request, selinux_kernel_module_request),
> > + LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_load_data, selinux_kernel_load_data),
> > LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_read_file, selinux_kernel_read_file),
> > LSM_HOOK_INIT(task_setpgid, selinux_task_setpgid),
> > LSM_HOOK_INIT(task_getpgid, selinux_task_getpgid),
> > --
> > 2.7.5
> >
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-29 23:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-29 18:01 [PATCH v4 0/8] kexec/firmware: support system wide policy requiring signatures Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] security: define new LSM hook named security_kernel_load_data Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 19:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] kexec: add call to LSM hook in original kexec_load syscall Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 20:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] ima: based on policy require signed kexec kernel images Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] firmware: add call to LSM hook before firmware sysfs fallback Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 18:19 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] ima: based on policy require signed firmware (sysfs fallback) Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 18:21 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 22:39 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 22:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 23:04 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] ima: add build time policy Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 7/8] ima: based on policy prevent loading firmware (pre-allocated buffer) Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 19:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 19:25 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-05 22:37 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-06 6:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-06-06 22:06 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-05-29 18:02 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] module: replace the existing LSM hook in init_module Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 22:39 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-29 23:14 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2018-05-30 21:00 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-31 15:23 ` [PATCH v4a " Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 22:28 ` Paul Moore
2018-06-04 9:19 ` Jessica Yu
2018-06-05 19:45 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 21:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 22:26 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 22:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:25 ` [PATCH v4 " Mimi Zohar
2018-05-30 2:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-05-30 21:09 ` Paul Moore
2018-06-04 14:03 ` [PATCH v4 0/8] kexec/firmware: support system wide policy requiring signatures Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 19:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 19:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 22:03 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 4:09 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 12:19 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 13:25 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 13:43 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 14:05 ` Mimi Zohar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1527635645.3534.39.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).