From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8A5F54F81 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 18:19:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754417996; cv=none; b=U/lwhIx1QoI1auMorNv95Vby1jmaQJ3UzbLRnDjB5JGLJWiVfh5Kn8ZuMO6DvBBwuk2sNt/rPuYbHe24yjnm8EZakA64S1OsCOK9ZBmkHD+HyN/b/OIMmpavvuASwz5IQO3ydQtD1E4PgwabtAzrEZi94fUTFy+JYu7UkwQ8xOU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754417996; c=relaxed/simple; bh=T3fiTc8+DtIiMrALFCcpmN5dqv1KvRX3bcYJQCuLJ+g=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:From:Subject:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=qEWxo9BfnsgXVYaompMKjKO3CWdt2ZFE2MCmlEvmg4954TFRUicRWrVohe1DtO/28kb1C7aiY82DwqH6KC1uk8eyZSsqRJFZKhhdwiTsDa+ykZrDc2qW/R+fVemO47z7I1PuXle/7210WGWY6eRHPOGCgt4LHnC7Fjk4w/7mx1Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b=UJoQXI94; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="UJoQXI94" Received: from [10.137.198.68] (unknown [131.107.8.68]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 23FC1202189A; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 11:19:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 23FC1202189A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1754417994; bh=nntAHqQzdBni82m8oRIXXPDNFI3VFOwEyFu4YYKX714=; h=Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=UJoQXI947bA26ZDWf/OLvwEmb18Xvk8OtCz4v6Pl0B13kNtdtLHn1JlKLTQS1ih0F HMAKeiXH2zGnZMS82f75ZsDSU+9XjCWq3HEKQ9gcNWYtGHJ2cv3XiHkDTPzbrJpacz 8IYDIvRCoXtkdBrospypoCyhWGMT9lszucnYl6pQ= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 11:19:53 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: selinux@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird From: Eric Suen Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: implement bpf_token_cmd and bpf_token_capable hooks To: Daniel Durning , Paul Moore Cc: Stephen Smalley , selinux@vger.kernel.org, omosnace@redhat.com References: <20250801154637.143931-1-danieldurning.work@gmail.com> <1986fe81af8.28a7.85c95baa4474aabc7814e68940a78392@paul-moore.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 8/5/2025 7:17 AM, Daniel Durning wrote: > On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 4:13 PM Paul Moore wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 8:18 AM Stephen Smalley >> wrote: >>> Eric - note that Daniel also posted a patch for the selinux-testsuite >>> to exercise these hooks and checks based on the Linux kernel self-test >>> for bpf tokens, see >>> https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/CAEjxPJ7DBDnZEFvgpe58K4B+4kZdOqUGMHvGC2vKt-4Zget=Hg@mail.gmail.com/T/#t >> FWIW, I believe Eric has some basic tests too, although I will admit >> to losing track of that aspect, as we have had several months of >> setbacks lately due to package building, email, etc. >> >>> Paul - it would be good to avoid such duplication of effort in the >>> future, maybe we should be tracking such things in the GitHub project? >> Yes, it's unfortunate when we see duplicated work, but thankfully it >> happens very rarely in our case. We can track things on GitHub, but >> with development happening largely on the mailing list I'm skeptical >> about how successful that will end up being. Our GH related efforts >> have been very mixed thus far. Another option might simply be to tell >> people to announce a development effort on the mailing list, although >> I can see that having problems too. >> >> If there are some positives, it may be that both Daniel and Eric's >> work are still in the early stages, so there is likely room for the >> two of them to cooperate together on a solution. Daniel, Eric, what >> do you think about that? > I would be happy to work with Eric on a solution. Looking forward to > seeing his patch once it gets posted. Thanks a lot, Daniel. I was actually hesitant to send out my changes since you already have test changes prepared, and I didn’t want to step on your toes. Really appreciate your openness to collaborate. I'll send out my patch soon and make sure to reference your test work in the description.