From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Cc: LKLM <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
LSM <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
SE Linux <selinux@tycho.nsa.gov>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 5/6] LSM: SO_PEERSEC configuration options
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:56:50 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2522719.Q8VOfUrvSY@sifl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51F93130.6040506@schaufler-ca.com>
On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 08:45:52 AM Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 7/30/2013 2:47 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 25, 2013 11:32:23 AM Casey Schaufler wrote:
> >> Subject: [PATCH v14 5/6] LSM: SO_PEERSEC configuration options
> >>
> >> Refine the handling of SO_PEERSEC to enable legacy
> >> user space runtimes, Fedora in particular, when running
> >> with multiple LSMs that are capable of providing information
> >> using getsockopt(). This introduces an additional configuration
> >> option, and requires that the default be the legacy behavior.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> --- a/security/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/security/Kconfig
> >> @@ -157,17 +157,49 @@ config SECMARK_LSM
> >>
> >> help
> >>
> >> The name of the LSM to use with the networking secmark
> >>
> >> -config SECURITY_PLAIN_CONTEXT
> >> - bool "Backward compatable contexts without lsm='value' formatting"
> >> - depends on SECURITY_SELINUX || SECURITY_SMACK
> >> - default y
> >> +choice
> >> + depends on SECURITY && (SECURITY_SELINUX || SECURITY_SMACK)
> >> + prompt "Peersec LSM"
> >> + default PEERSEC_SECURITY_FIRST
> >> +
> >>
> >> help
> >>
> >> - Without this value set security context strings will
> >> - include the name of the lsm with which they are associated
> >> - even if there is only one LSM that uses security contexts.
> >> - This matches the way contexts were handled before it was
> >> - possible to have multiple concurrent security modules.
> >> - If you are unsure how to answer this question, answer Y.
> >> + Select the security module that will send attribute
> >> + information in IP header options.
> >> + Most SELinux configurations do not take advantage
> >> + of Netlabel, while all Smack configurations do. Unless
> >> + there is a need to do otherwise chose Smack in preference
> >> + to SELinux.
> >
> > I'm not hugely in love with the help text; the first sentence seems to be
> > all that is needed, the second seems unnecessary and not exactly fair to
> > the LSMs.
>
> I can take out the "friendly advice". What it really should say
> is more on the lines of:
>
> If you have gotten to the point where you have to make
> this decision you should probably call it a work day, go
> home, have a nice drink and spend some time with a loved
> one. In the morning take a good hard look at your network
> configuration. You may end up with a different security
> policies being enforced with IPv4 and IPv6 communications.
Perfect ;)
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-31 17:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-25 18:22 [PATCH v14 0/6] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs Casey Schaufler
2013-07-25 18:32 ` [PATCH v14 1/6] LSM: Security blob abstraction Casey Schaufler
2013-07-29 21:15 ` Kees Cook
2013-07-30 1:49 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-07-25 18:32 ` [PATCH v14 2/6] LSM: Move the capability LSM into the hook handlers Casey Schaufler
2013-07-25 18:32 ` [PATCH v14 3/6] LSM: Explicit individual LSM associations Casey Schaufler
2013-07-29 20:51 ` Kees Cook
2013-07-30 1:48 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-07-30 22:08 ` Paul Moore
2013-07-31 16:22 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-07-31 19:39 ` Paul Moore
2013-07-31 21:21 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-08-01 18:35 ` Paul Moore
2013-08-01 18:52 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-08-01 21:30 ` Paul Moore
2013-08-01 22:15 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-08-01 22:18 ` Paul Moore
2013-07-25 18:32 ` [PATCH v14 4/6] LSM: List based multiple LSM hooks Casey Schaufler
2013-07-25 18:32 ` [PATCH v14 5/6] LSM: SO_PEERSEC configuration options Casey Schaufler
2013-07-30 21:47 ` Paul Moore
2013-07-31 15:45 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-07-31 17:56 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2013-07-25 18:32 ` [PATCH v14 6/6] LSM: Multiple LSM Documentation and cleanup Casey Schaufler
2013-07-26 23:17 ` Randy Dunlap
2013-07-28 18:46 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-08-01 2:48 ` [PATCH v14 0/6] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs Balbir Singh
2013-08-01 17:21 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-08-06 3:28 ` Balbir Singh
2013-08-06 6:30 ` Kees Cook
2013-08-06 22:25 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-08-06 22:36 ` Kees Cook
2013-08-27 2:29 ` Casey Schaufler
2013-08-28 15:55 ` Kees Cook
2013-09-05 18:48 ` Kees Cook
2013-09-06 6:44 ` Casey Schaufler
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=2522719.Q8VOfUrvSY@sifl \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
/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