linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Janne Karhunen <janne.karhunen@gmail.com>,
	linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
	Konsta Karsisto <konsta.karsisto@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima: ima/lsm policy rule loading logic bug fixes
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:54:58 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1578581698.5147.51.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200109140821.17902-1-janne.karhunen@gmail.com>

On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 16:08 +0200, Janne Karhunen wrote:
> Keep the ima policy rules around from the beginning even
> if they appear invalid at the time of loading, as they
> may become active after the lsm policy load. In other
> words, now the lsm and the ima can be initialized in any
> order and the handling logic is the same as with the lsm
> rule reload event.
> 
> Patch also fixes the rule re-use during the lsm policy
> reload and makes some prints a bit more human readable.

Thanks, Janne.  What do you think about adding a single sentence at
the end of this patch description?  Something along the lines of,
"With these changes, there no need to defer loading a custom IMA
policy, based on LSM rules, until after the LSM policy has been
initialized."

The line length, here, is a bit short.  According to section "14) the
canonical path format" of Documentation/process/submitting-
patches.rst, the body of the explanation shouldl be line wrapped at 75
columns.

> 
> Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
> Reported-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Janne Karhunen <janne.karhunen@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Konsta Karsisto <konsta.karsisto@gmail.com>

Please include a "Fixes" tag as well.  Otherwise,

Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>


      reply	other threads:[~2020-01-09 14:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-09 14:08 [PATCH] ima: ima/lsm policy rule loading logic bug fixes Janne Karhunen
2020-01-09 14:54 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]

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=1578581698.5147.51.camel@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --cc=janne.karhunen@gmail.com \
    --cc=konsta.karsisto@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --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).