Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261577AbVETUll (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 16:41:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261582AbVETUll (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 16:41:41 -0400 Received: from igw2.watson.ibm.com ([129.34.20.6]:63916 "EHLO igw2.watson.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261577AbVETUl0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 16:41:26 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:41:23 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) From: Reiner Sailer To: James Morris cc: Andrew Morton , Chris Wright , emilyr@us.ibm.com, yoder1@us.ibm.com, kylene@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, toml@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1 of 4] ima: related TPM device driver interal kernel interface Message-ID: X-Warning: UNAuthenticated Sender MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1610 Lines: 49 James Morris wrote on 05/20/2005 04:32:58 PM: > On Fri, 20 May 2005, Reiner Sailer wrote: > > > > Why are you using LSM for this? > > > > > > LSM should be used for comprehensive access control frameworks which > > > significantly enhance or even replace existing Unix DAC security. > > > > I see LSM is framework for security. IMA is an architecture that > > enforces access control in a different way than SELinux. IMA guarantees > > that executable content is measured and accounted for before > > it is loaded and can access (and possibly corrupt) system resources. > > LSM is an access control framework. Your (few) LSM hooks always return > zero, and don't enforce access control at all. You even have a separate > measurement hook for modules. > > I suggest implementing all of your code via distinct measurement hooks, so > measurement becomes a distinct and well defined security entity within the > kernel. This is certainly possible. This means that there will be 5 more hooks (such as the one in kernel/module.c, see PATCH 4 of 4). If the kernel maintainers are in favor of this approach, then there is not much that stands against this. > LSM should not be used just because it has a few hooks in the right place > for your code. > > > - James > -- > James Morris > > > > > Thanks Reiner - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/