Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221025184519.13231-1-casey@schaufler-ca.com>
 <20221025184519.13231-5-casey@schaufler-ca.com> <Y1jNGMKfb+NUPrJS@kroah.com>
 <e3949b66-26fe-807e-a626-79ca78396e8a@schaufler-ca.com> <Y1olXIbTGx9NnthU@kroah.com>
 <d545ef2a-5cc5-2848-e699-ff791d34d7c7@schaufler-ca.com> <Y1q8SzpcdWgm/fLq@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <Y1q8SzpcdWgm/fLq@kroah.com>
From:   Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2022 18:34:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhRv=o98MsYzYLZ+uHhvr6GxiX2tgkK07EEFdHnxWMSP7g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] LSM: Maintain a table of LSM attribute data
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
        casey.schaufler@intel.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        jmorris@namei.org, keescook@chromium.org,
        john.johansen@canonical.com, penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp,
        stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, mic@digikod.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:14 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 10:08:23AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> > On 10/26/2022 11:29 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 05:38:21PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> > >> On 10/25/2022 11:00 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 11:45:15AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> > >>>> As LSMs are registered add their lsm_id pointers to a table.
> > >>>> This will be used later for attribute reporting.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>>  include/linux/security.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > >>>>  security/security.c      | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>>  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/security.h b/include/linux/security.h
> > >>>> index ca1b7109c0db..e1678594d983 100644
> > >>>> --- a/include/linux/security.h
> > >>>> +++ b/include/linux/security.h
> > >>>> @@ -138,6 +138,23 @@ enum lockdown_reason {
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  extern const char *const lockdown_reasons[LOCKDOWN_CONFIDENTIALITY_MAX+1];
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +#define LSMID_ENTRIES ( \
> > >>>> +        1 + /* capabilities */ \
> > >>> No #define for capabilities?
> > >> Nope. There isn't one. CONFIG_SECURITY takes care of it.
> > >>
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_SMACK) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_IMA) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_APPARMOR) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_YAMA) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_LOADPIN) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_SAFESETID) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_LOCKDOWN) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BPF_LSM) ? 1 : 0) + \
> > >>>> +        (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_LANDLOCK) ? 1 : 0))
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> +extern int lsm_id;
> > >>> u64?
> > >> u32. I doubt we'll get more than 32K security modules.
> > > These should be bits, not values, right?
> >
> > lsm_id is the count of security modules that are registered.
> > It seemed like a good name for the value at the time, but as
> > it's causing confusion I should probably change it.
>
> Yeah, that's confusing.  "lsm_num_availble" might be better.

Yes, this really should be named something else.  I'm partial to
"lsm_count" as it is shorter than the other suggestion, but this is
hardly something to worry too much about.

--
paul-moore.com