Re: [PATCH v12 0/9] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

[John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>]

On 01/10/2013 04:46 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com> writes:
> 
>> On 01/09/2013 05:28 AM, James Morris wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Jan 2013, John Johansen wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I'd say we need to see the actual use-case for Smack and Apparmor being 
>>>>> used together, along with at least one major distro committing to support 
>>>>> this.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ubuntu is very interested in stacking
>>>
>>> Which modules?
>>>
>> Well Yama which has now been special cased, and in the past there has been
>> discussion about other special case LSMs like case is proposing for module
>> loading. There has been interest around both selinux + apparmor and
>> smack + apparmor. I am not sure of all of the use cases that have lead to
>> such question but some of them have been around containers, with say
>> selinux on the host and apparmor in the container, or visa versa.
> 
> When a distro is run in a container it is desirable to be able to run
> the distro's security policy in that container.  Ideally this will get
> addressed by being able to do some level of per user namespace stacking.
> Say selinux outside and apparmor inside a container.
> 
> I think this would take a little more work than what Casey has currently
> devised but I am hopeful an additional layer of stacking can be added
> after Casey has merged the basic layer of stacking.
> 
Right the general case will take more, but doing things like selinux on
the outside and apparmor inside are doable right now. And we are working
on supporting stacked apparmor policy right now so apparmor outside and
a different apparmor policy inside will be doable soon.