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;
Subject: Re: Linux 5.1-rc2
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
References: <CAHk-=wgg_PRWs3a6u2gnFLQjhxOJcrFkqqWVnLw60eQAwD-DNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <2d4f3bfa-22c7-a18c-3902-fe1b6ac401f7@infradead.org>
 <alpine.LRH.2.21.1903260607500.13529@namei.org>
 <8811b2e4-28e1-2f01-024b-fb7d0196483f@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
 <CAGXu5jJZ1H1RFMFBxPsoBW+T17ya+50-d7-31Gr9ciRgpCOaDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <98289cd2-095a-f0cd-e405-887ecbba0030@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
 <CAGXu5jKWECKxksJWPpCkBKG+wB26DhYK=nYBpuuoS+Pv9AsNwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e1f6f5a6-9fce-2e95-4593-79f1e836bac5@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
 <CAGXu5jL0YzgQR_p9otyOX4+00a0i7Tfv9aLqauZFZs4-Kfjakg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <ea75aace-a493-b2fa-1fef-d6ae76085c39@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date:   Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:05:14 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jL0YzgQR_p9otyOX4+00a0i7Tfv9aLqauZFZs4-Kfjakg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2019/03/28 6:43, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> I don't see problems for an exclusive LSM user (AA, SELinux, Smack)
>>> also initializing TOMOYO, though. It should be a no-op. Is there some
>>> situation where this is not true?
>>
>> There should be no problem except some TOMOYO messages are printed.
> 
> Okay, so I should send my latest version of the patch to James? Or do
> you explicitly want TOMOYO removed from all the CONFIG_LSM default
> lines except when selected by CONFIG_DEFAULT_SECURITY_TOMOYO? (I worry
> the latter will lead to less testing of the stacking.)
> 

My approach is "opt-in" while your approach is "opt-out". And the problem
here is that people might fail to change CONFIG_LSM from the default value
to what they need. (And Jakub did not change CONFIG_LSM to reflect
CONFIG_DEFAULT_SECURITY_APPARMOR from the old config.) Thus, I suggest
"opt-in" approach; which includes up to only one legacy major LSM and allows
people to change the default value to include multiple legacy major LSMs.

You can propose your latest version. If SELinux/Smack/AppArmor people
prefer "opt-out" approach, I'm fine with "opt-out" approach.