Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8f48e1d0-c109-f8a9-ea94-9659b16cae49@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
 <0d23d1a5-d4af-debf-6b5f-aaaf698daaa8@schaufler-ca.com> <201902070230.x172UUG6002087@www262.sakura.ne.jp>
 <6def6199-0235-7c37-974c-baf731725606@schaufler-ca.com>
In-Reply-To: <6def6199-0235-7c37-974c-baf731725606@schaufler-ca.com>
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Date:   Fri, 8 Feb 2019 13:33:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJm+qxgnmRjJtTuaqj6N7WP+TVF4tUm30WUmMDT3irvFg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LSM: Allow syzbot to ignore security= parameter.
To:     Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Cc:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
        syzbot <syzbot+21016130b0580a9de3b5@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com>,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>,
        Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com>,
        SELinux <selinux@vger.kernel.org>,
        Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>,
        Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 8:24 AM Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
> I added Kees to the CC list. Kees, what to you think about
> ignoring security= if lsm= is specified? I'm ambivalent.

This was one of many earlier suggestions, and the consensus seemed to
be "don't mix security= and lsm=". Why would anyone use both?

-- 
Kees Cook