Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757755Ab0GAT6E (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:58:04 -0400 Received: from msux-gh1-uea01.nsa.gov ([63.239.65.39]:54385 "EHLO msux-gh1-uea01.nsa.gov" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754553Ab0GAT6A (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:58:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Yama: add PTRACE exception tracking From: Stephen Smalley To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: Kees Cook , James Morris , Christoph Hellwig , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20100701194103.GA26620@hallyn.com> References: <20100630003844.GE4837@outflux.net> <20100630073158.GA4453@infradead.org> <20100701044401.GY4837@outflux.net> <20100701132038.GA24394@hallyn.com> <20100701171624.GZ4837@outflux.net> <20100701194103.GA26620@hallyn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Organization: National Security Agency Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 15:57:55 -0400 Message-ID: <1278014275.15753.207.camel@moss-pluto.epoch.ncsc.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 (2.28.3-1.fc12) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1535 Lines: 35 On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 14:41 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Kees Cook (kees.cook@canonical.com): > > > > I still think simple chaining is the way to go. I want to review the > > > > earlier discussions first (I think Serge said it was in 2004ish?) before I > > > > write up anything. There is, I think, one sticking point, which is > > > > /proc/self/attr/current, but beyond that, I think some simple > > > > reorganization of LSM initialization routines and a list that security_* > > > > walks would be sufficient. > > > > > > In the past, output results for each LSM were simply split by \n or a : > > > or something, and input was prepended by the LSM name. > > > > This doesn't appear to be true anymore. Looking at the fs/proc/base.c and > > security/selinux/hooks.c code, there is no checking for a prepended LSM > > name. Maybe that's the first chaining limitation -- you can't chain 2 LSMs > > that both declare setprocattr hooks. > > No no, Stephen and I were talking about in the stacker patchset, again > around 2004-2005. Never went upstream (per 2005 or 2006 ksummit > agreement). Patch series was also available from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/lsm-stacker/files/ Looks like it was last updated in 2006. -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency -- 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/