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 5EF0AC38A02 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 10:14:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229996AbiJ1KOU (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2022 06:14:20 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59668 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229992AbiJ1KOT (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2022 06:14:19 -0400 Received: from smtp-relay-canonical-0.canonical.com (smtp-relay-canonical-0.canonical.com [185.125.188.120]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B35051B8649; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 03:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.20.1.180] (unknown [62.168.35.11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay-canonical-0.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E91F5422EB; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 10:14:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canonical.com; s=20210705; t=1666952050; bh=QOVPGGl1Px8T1+mV9Kvd/BwJ9ofEBLRLHMNLh/7/g2M=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=IN3QDYXAbK6CtXyvxpSNa3C30NrqUeOZenksIIIUsuvZ30sW636gRG6eKGhHqmOYj yextF8kycHxvCCRGPIqX9GtWzlXKyC32kDfIVOaF9KsGrETSfRyJkKB5g86bkmzKgB JZmvxG/2ORc0TO+TTx7SdNsoWyx2a0NDXQLpoe8E2ECIcU4LkMH+UIdCT4NpdbdNcq o9oFs7rguNrA2aj28o34UEi7ObtllkvxSSQXQq1XxWSo2KtDbAxMfBMFPf2dkGNMaN Ey5w2Aa/O7j0iKyEncxSJLuSSRGEZyJbIFwWB3scyZ6+d/NXktXo0LDZSIiNJ1WqCe Jj9dgKJjbYQGg== Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 03:14:09 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.2 Subject: Re: LSM stacking in next for 6.1? Content-Language: en-US To: Tetsuo Handa , Casey Schaufler , Paul Moore Cc: LSM List , James Morris , linux-audit@redhat.com, Mimi Zohar , keescook@chromium.org, SElinux list References: <791e13b5-bebd-12fc-53de-e9a86df23836.ref@schaufler-ca.com> <5ef4a1ae-e92c-ca77-7089-2efe1d4c4e6d@schaufler-ca.com> <1a9f9182-9188-2f64-4a17-ead2fed70348@schaufler-ca.com> <2225aec6-f0f3-d38e-ee3c-6139a7c25a37@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <5995f18c-5623-9d97-0aa6-5f13a2a8e895@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <77ec837a-ff64-e6f0-fe14-a54c1646ea0b@canonical.com> <0fcc5444-a957-f107-25a1-3540588eab5a@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <11564f69-3bba-abf7-eb46-06813ff4a404@schaufler-ca.com> <98ab33d6-6c91-9c0a-8647-22f6bdede885@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <3266c2c2-cd7e-bc0f-0fc4-478a63d6ee77@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> From: John Johansen Organization: Canonical In-Reply-To: <3266c2c2-cd7e-bc0f-0fc4-478a63d6ee77@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 10/26/22 03:19, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2022/10/26 7:41, Casey Schaufler wrote: >> You need a built-in LSM that loads and manages loadable >> security modules. > > That is no longer loadable LSM modules. A loadable LSM module must be capable of > loading any code and using any interface that is allowed to loadable kernel modules > using /sbin/insmod command. That is my understanding of what you have promised (and > the reason I am allowing you to continue working on LSM stacking before I make > CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO=m). > Tetsuo, think of it this way. LSM stacking is going to make it much easier for new LSM modules because they won't automatically be excluded because one of the other LSMs is needed. The problem of loadable LSM modules is orthogonal, and Casey shouldn't need to solve it in this patch series. That is further work to be taken up by another, as Casey has clearly stated its work he is not interested in doing. However the real problem you are trying to solve won't be solved by loadable LSM modules, though they may help. Just having loadable LSMs modules won't mean a distro will build an LSM as a loadable module instead of disabling it, nor does it mean a distro will allow loading an out of tree LSM module. Even if the upstream kernel doesn't provide an option to block loading them, distros will.