Re: SMACK or SELinux, but not both

[Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>]

Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 20:28 +1100, James Morris wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>>
>>> If SELinux is registered before SMACK, SMACK panics after
>>> register_security() call.
>>>
>>> If SMACK is registered before SELinux, SELinux panics after
>>> register_security() call.
>>>
>>> Consequently allmodconfig kernel doesn't boot. It would be nice if
>>> some Kconfig magic to exclude each other will be in place.
>> People want to be able to select the security model at boot time, so the 
>> option to build both LSMs is required.
>>
>> You can stop SELinux from attempting to register as an LSM via selinux=0, 
>> which should allow you to boot with just Smack enabled.
> 
> Ideally, one could just boot with security=<module> to select the
> desired primary security module.  security=smack, security=selinux, or
> security=capability.
> 
> Having to specify selinux=0 smack=0 foo=0 just to get bar wouldn't be
> pretty.  Not that anyone would want to do that, of course...
> 
And doesn't scale well as we add more security models. Oh, that will 
never happen, right? I still like "security="

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot