Message-ID: <397cb437bbd41e7eb223a07bc92a10bb57df696e.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] security: Introduce LSM_ORDER_LAST and set it
 for the integrity LSM
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>,
        dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, paul@paul-moore.com, jmorris@namei.org,
        serge@hallyn.com, mic@digikod.net
Cc:     linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org,
        Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 09 Mar 2023 08:20:34 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20230309085433.1810314-2-roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
References: <20230309085433.1810314-1-roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
         <20230309085433.1810314-2-roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2023-03-09 at 09:54 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
> 
> Introduce LSM_ORDER_LAST, to satisfy the requirement of LSMs needing to be
> last, e.g. the 'integrity' LSM, without changing the kernel command line or
> configuration.
> 
> Also, set this order for the 'integrity' LSM. While not enforced, this is
> the only LSM expected to use it.
> 
> Similarly to LSM_ORDER_FIRST, LSMs with LSM_ORDER_LAST are always enabled
> and put at the end of the LSM list.
> 
> Finally, for LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE LSMs, set the found variable to true if an
> LSM is found, regardless of its order. In this way, the kernel would not
> wrongly report that the LSM is not built-in in the kernel if its order is
> LSM_ORDER_LAST.
> 
> Fixes: 79f7865d844c ("LSM: Introduce "lsm=" for boottime LSM selection")
> Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>

Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>