* [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
@ 2019-02-12 18:23 Kees Cook
2019-02-13 16:05 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-25 23:23 ` James Morris
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2019-02-12 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: James Morris; +Cc: Tetsuo Handa, linux-security-module, linux-kernel
To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is
used on the command line, and report that it is happening.
Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 10 ++++------
security/security.c | 8 ++++++--
2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
index 93d2c97f28fe..a0abd5f56e00 100644
--- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
@@ -2340,7 +2340,7 @@
lsm=lsm1,...,lsmN
[SECURITY] Choose order of LSM initialization. This
- overrides CONFIG_LSM.
+ overrides CONFIG_LSM, and the "security=" parameter.
machvec= [IA-64] Force the use of a particular machine-vector
(machvec) in a generic kernel.
@@ -4129,11 +4129,9 @@
Note: increases power consumption, thus should only be
enabled if running jitter sensitive (HPC/RT) workloads.
- security= [SECURITY] Choose a security module to enable at boot.
- If this boot parameter is not specified, only the first
- security module asking for security registration will be
- loaded. An invalid security module name will be treated
- as if no module has been chosen.
+ security= [SECURITY] Choose a legacy "major" security module to
+ enable at boot. This has been deprecated by the
+ "lsm=" parameter.
selinux= [SELINUX] Disable or enable SELinux at boot time.
Format: { "0" | "1" }
diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
index 3147785e20d7..23cbb1a295a3 100644
--- a/security/security.c
+++ b/security/security.c
@@ -288,9 +288,13 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_init(void)
ordered_lsms = kcalloc(LSM_COUNT + 1, sizeof(*ordered_lsms),
GFP_KERNEL);
- if (chosen_lsm_order)
+ if (chosen_lsm_order) {
+ if (chosen_major_lsm) {
+ pr_info("security= is ignored because it is superseded by lsm=\n");
+ chosen_major_lsm = NULL;
+ }
ordered_lsm_parse(chosen_lsm_order, "cmdline");
- else
+ } else
ordered_lsm_parse(builtin_lsm_order, "builtin");
for (lsm = ordered_lsms; *lsm; lsm++)
--
2.17.1
--
Kees Cook
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
2019-02-12 18:23 [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified Kees Cook
@ 2019-02-13 16:05 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-17 5:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-02-25 23:23 ` James Morris
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Casey Schaufler @ 2019-02-13 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook, James Morris; +Cc: Tetsuo Handa, linux-security-module, linux-kernel
On 2/12/2019 10:23 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is
> used on the command line, and report that it is happening.
>
> Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
> ---
> Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 10 ++++------
> security/security.c | 8 ++++++--
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 93d2c97f28fe..a0abd5f56e00 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2340,7 +2340,7 @@
>
> lsm=lsm1,...,lsmN
> [SECURITY] Choose order of LSM initialization. This
> - overrides CONFIG_LSM.
> + overrides CONFIG_LSM, and the "security=" parameter.
>
> machvec= [IA-64] Force the use of a particular machine-vector
> (machvec) in a generic kernel.
> @@ -4129,11 +4129,9 @@
> Note: increases power consumption, thus should only be
> enabled if running jitter sensitive (HPC/RT) workloads.
>
> - security= [SECURITY] Choose a security module to enable at boot.
> - If this boot parameter is not specified, only the first
> - security module asking for security registration will be
> - loaded. An invalid security module name will be treated
> - as if no module has been chosen.
> + security= [SECURITY] Choose a legacy "major" security module to
> + enable at boot. This has been deprecated by the
> + "lsm=" parameter.
>
> selinux= [SELINUX] Disable or enable SELinux at boot time.
> Format: { "0" | "1" }
> diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> index 3147785e20d7..23cbb1a295a3 100644
> --- a/security/security.c
> +++ b/security/security.c
> @@ -288,9 +288,13 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_init(void)
> ordered_lsms = kcalloc(LSM_COUNT + 1, sizeof(*ordered_lsms),
> GFP_KERNEL);
>
> - if (chosen_lsm_order)
> + if (chosen_lsm_order) {
> + if (chosen_major_lsm) {
> + pr_info("security= is ignored because it is superseded by lsm=\n");
> + chosen_major_lsm = NULL;
> + }
> ordered_lsm_parse(chosen_lsm_order, "cmdline");
> - else
> + } else
> ordered_lsm_parse(builtin_lsm_order, "builtin");
>
> for (lsm = ordered_lsms; *lsm; lsm++)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
2019-02-13 16:05 ` Casey Schaufler
@ 2019-02-17 5:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-02-18 2:45 ` Paul Moore
2019-02-21 13:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tetsuo Handa @ 2019-02-17 5:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: SELinux, kernel-team
Cc: Casey Schaufler, Kees Cook, James Morris, linux-security-module,
linux-kernel
On 2019/02/14 1:05, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 2/12/2019 10:23 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is
>> used on the command line, and report that it is happening.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>
> Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
>
The manual for TOMOYO was updated to follow this change.
SELinux folks and AppArmor folks, can we apply this change?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
2019-02-17 5:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
@ 2019-02-18 2:45 ` Paul Moore
2019-02-18 3:57 ` Kees Cook
2019-02-21 13:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Paul Moore @ 2019-02-18 2:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tetsuo Handa
Cc: SELinux, kernel-team, Casey Schaufler, Kees Cook, James Morris,
linux-security-module, linux-kernel
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 12:17 AM Tetsuo Handa
<penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> On 2019/02/14 1:05, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> > On 2/12/2019 10:23 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is
> >> used on the command line, and report that it is happening.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> >
> > Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
>
> The manual for TOMOYO was updated to follow this change.
> SELinux folks and AppArmor folks, can we apply this change?
My main concern is that "selinux={0|1}" continues to work as it has
for years. It doesn't look like this affects that, but I can't say
I've dug into these changes very far.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
2019-02-18 2:45 ` Paul Moore
@ 2019-02-18 3:57 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2019-02-18 3:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Moore
Cc: Tetsuo Handa, SELinux, Ubuntu Kernel Team, Casey Schaufler,
James Morris, linux-security-module, LKML
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 6:46 PM Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> wrote:
> My main concern is that "selinux={0|1}" continues to work as it has
> for years. It doesn't look like this affects that, but I can't say
> I've dug into these changes very far.
Yup, no worries; it does. :)
--
Kees Cook
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
2019-02-17 5:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-02-18 2:45 ` Paul Moore
@ 2019-02-21 13:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-02-22 10:00 ` John Johansen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tetsuo Handa @ 2019-02-21 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Johansen
Cc: Casey Schaufler, Kees Cook, James Morris, linux-security-module,
apparmor
On 2019/02/17 14:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/02/14 1:05, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 2/12/2019 10:23 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is
>>> used on the command line, and report that it is happening.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>
>> Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
>>
>
> The manual for TOMOYO was updated to follow this change.
> SELinux folks and AppArmor folks, can we apply this change?
>
No response from Ubuntu kernel team. Redirecting to AppArmor list...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
2019-02-21 13:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
@ 2019-02-22 10:00 ` John Johansen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: John Johansen @ 2019-02-22 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tetsuo Handa
Cc: Casey Schaufler, Kees Cook, James Morris, linux-security-module,
apparmor
On 2/21/19 5:12 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/02/17 14:16, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> On 2019/02/14 1:05, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>> On 2/12/2019 10:23 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>> To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is
>>>> used on the command line, and report that it is happening.
>>>>
>>>> Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
>>>
>>
>> The manual for TOMOYO was updated to follow this change.
>> SELinux folks and AppArmor folks, can we apply this change?
>>
>
> No response from Ubuntu kernel team. Redirecting to AppArmor list...
>
yeah this is okay
Acked-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified
2019-02-12 18:23 [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified Kees Cook
2019-02-13 16:05 ` Casey Schaufler
@ 2019-02-25 23:23 ` James Morris
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: James Morris @ 2019-02-25 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook; +Cc: Tetsuo Handa, linux-security-module, linux-kernel
On Tue, 12 Feb 2019, Kees Cook wrote:
> To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is
> used on the command line, and report that it is happening.
>
> Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Applied to
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/linux-security.git next-general
--
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-02-25 23:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-02-12 18:23 [PATCH v2] LSM: Ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is specified Kees Cook
2019-02-13 16:05 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-02-17 5:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-02-18 2:45 ` Paul Moore
2019-02-18 3:57 ` Kees Cook
2019-02-21 13:12 ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-02-22 10:00 ` John Johansen
2019-02-25 23:23 ` James Morris
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).