From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux: avoid nf hooks overhead when not needed
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:38:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1460713133.7410.2.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhSgWAoWgywOZOvT76jCcHuEywjFu5CKJo9D0k+66RbFCA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2016-04-14 at 18:53 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Will be ok if we post a v2 version of this series, removing the hooks
> > de-registration bits, but preserving the selinux nf-hooks and
> > socket_sock_rcv_skb() on-demand/delayed registration ? Will that fit
> > with the post-init read only memory usage that you are planning ?
>
> The work Florian and and I were talking about would be limited just to
> the netfilter hooks, the LSM hooks, e.g. socket_sock_rcv_skb() and
> friends, would remain as they are today. What what we discussing was
> defaulting to not registering the netfilter hooks until it became
> necessary due to a labeled networking configuration or the
> always_check_network policy capability; the registration of the
> netfilter hooks would be permanent, you could not unregister the hooks
> at that point, you would need to reboot. Does that make sense?
Yes, AFAIC it makes sense. I'll try to follow this route for an eventual
v2.
> As far as Casey's concerns, I don't think the work we are talking
> about for the v2 patchset would have any effect on the socket/sock
> security blobs as you really can't manage those adequately from the
> netfilter hooks; you most likely will reference them and perhaps even
> update the data within, but not allocate or free the blobs. Besides,
> even in some weird case you were alloc/free'ing security blobs in the
> netfilter hooks, we can deal with that on a per-LSM basis if/when the
> full fledged stacking patches are merged; everything we are talking
> about is a hidden implementation detail so changing it in the future
> shouldn't be a problem.
Casey, are you ok with the above?
Thank you,
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-15 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-06 9:51 [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux: avoid nf hooks overhead when not needed Paolo Abeni
2016-04-06 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] security: add hook for netlabel status change notification Paolo Abeni
2016-04-06 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] selinux: implement support for dynamic net hook [de-]registration Paolo Abeni
2016-04-06 22:32 ` Casey Schaufler
2016-04-06 12:33 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux: avoid nf hooks overhead when not needed Paul Moore
2016-04-06 14:03 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-04-06 14:07 ` Paul Moore
2016-04-06 18:23 ` David Miller
2016-04-06 18:36 ` Paul Moore
2016-04-06 19:39 ` David Miller
2016-04-06 20:07 ` Paul Moore
2016-04-06 22:14 ` Florian Westphal
2016-04-06 23:15 ` Paul Moore
2016-04-06 23:45 ` Florian Westphal
2016-04-07 18:55 ` Paul Moore
2016-04-12 8:52 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-04-12 13:57 ` Casey Schaufler
2016-04-13 11:57 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-04-13 15:06 ` Casey Schaufler
2016-04-14 22:53 ` Paul Moore
2016-04-15 9:38 ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2016-04-15 15:54 ` Casey Schaufler
2016-04-06 21:37 ` Casey Schaufler
2016-04-06 21:43 ` Paul Moore
2016-04-06 21:43 ` Casey Schaufler
2016-04-07 7:59 ` Paolo Abeni
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=1460713133.7410.2.camel@redhat.com \
--to=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=agruenba@redhat.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=james.l.morris@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).