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;
Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 12:40:55 +1000 (AEST)
From:   James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
To:     Matthew Garrett <matthewgarrett@google.com>
cc:     linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Turn lockdown into an LSM
In-Reply-To: <20190521224013.3782-1-matthewgarrett@google.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1905221203070.3967@namei.org>
References: <20190521224013.3782-1-matthewgarrett@google.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 21 May 2019, Matthew Garrett wrote:

> Hi James,
> 
> This is a quick attempt to integrate lockdown into the existing LSM
> framework. It adds a new lockdown security hook and an LSM that defines
> the existing coarse-grained policy, and also adds a new
> DEFINE_EARLY_LSM() definition in order to permit lockdown (and
> potentially other modules) to be initialised at the top of kernel init
> in order to allow policy to be imposed on stuff that happens in
> setup_arch(). The goal here is to allow policy to be devolved to other
> LSMs on systems that have a secure mechanism for loading LSM policy
> early in boot, allowing creation of arbitrarily complicated policies
> without interfering with the common-case coarse-grained approach.
> 
> This should probably be extended so a uapi-exposed constant is passed to
> the hook in order to make it easier to write policy in other LSMs, but
> does this broadly look like you were imagining?

This looks promising!

An LSM could also potentially implement its own policy for the hook.

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>