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: <20190521224013.3782-1-matthewgarrett@google.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1905221203070.3967@namei.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1905221203070.3967@namei.org>
From:   Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 09:48:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CACdnJuuTR=Ut4giPKC=kdxgY9yPv8+3PZyEzuxvON3Jr_92XnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Turn lockdown into an LSM
To:     James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc:     LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 7:40 PM James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> wrote:
> An LSM could also potentially implement its own policy for the hook.

That was my plan. Right now the hook just gets an ASCII description of
the reason for the lockdown - that seems suboptimal for cases like
SELinux. What information would you want? My initial thinking was to
just have a stable enum of lockdown reasons that's in the UAPI headers
and then let other LSM tooling consume that, but I haven't spent
enough time with the internals of SELinux to know if there'd be a more
attractive solution.