Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Nov 2022 17:29:15 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] security: Add CONFIG_LSM_AUTO to handle default LSM stack ordering | From | Mickaël Salaün <> |
| |
On 18/10/2022 21:31, Paul Moore wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 1:55 AM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 09:45:21PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
[...]
>>> We can have defaults, like we do know, but I'm in no hurry to remove >>> the ability to allow admins to change the ordering at boot time. >> >> My concern is with new LSMs vs the build system. A system builder will >> be prompted for a new CONFIG_SECURITY_SHINY, but won't be prompted >> about making changes to CONFIG_LSM to include it. > > I would argue that if an admin/builder doesn't understand what a shiny > new LSM does, they shouldn't be enabling that shiny new LSM. Adding > new, potentially restrictive, controls to your kernel build without a > basic understanding of those controls is a recipe for disaster and I > try to avoid recommending disaster as a planned course of action :)
It depends on what this shiny new LSMs do *by default*. In the case of Landlock, it do nothing unless a process does specific system calls (same as for most new kernel features: sysfs entries, syscall flags…). I guess this is the same for most LSMs.
| |