Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks | From | Stephen Smalley <> | Date | Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:01:10 -0400 |
| |
On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 09:42 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > --- Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov> wrote: > > > This would be fine, if the technical approach were > > sound (not necessarily the same as SELinux, but > sound) > > Please accept that this is a judgement call.
Judgment calls have to be made all the time; this is no different. One would hope that particularly in the arena of security, sound judgment would be applied. In this particular case, it isn't just security folks who are troubled by reliance on pathnames, and there are plenty of prior discussions on linux-fsdevel and linux-kernel describing the brokenness of path-based approaches. Why would the answer be different now?
> > and fit properly with the LSM interface. > > Of course LSM will fit SELinux better than it fits > AppArmour, LSM has been adapted to fit the needs > of SELinux.
This is a gross misrepresentation of the facts and history of LSM. LSM was jointly developed, and the initial VFS inode hooks were proposed by none other than the WireX folks, i.e. the developers of SubDomain/AppArmor. From that initial proposal, though the entire development of LSM, through the 2.5 development series after LSM was merged, and through the 2.6 stable series so far, no one from the AppArmor side has ever suggested a need to change the hooks to better accomodate their needs. Yet if you look at their implementation (and I have, have you?), you'll see that they have to go through contortions because the LSM interface is such a mismatch for what they do. That isn't due to any "adaptations" for SELinux.
> SELinux wasn't always a good fit either. LSM > accomodated SELinux. Offer the same community > cooperation to other you have yourself received.
Community cooperation doesn't mean embracing unsound ideas.
-- 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/
| |