> On 9 May 2024, at 16:24, Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 3:00 AM KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> One idea here is that only LSM hooks with default_state = false can be toggled.
>>
>> This would also any ROPs that try to abuse this function. Maybe we can call "default_disabled" .toggleable (or dynamic)
>>
>> and change the corresponding LSM_INIT_TOGGLEABLE. Kees, Paul, this may be a fair middle ground?
>
> Seems reasonable to me, although I think it's worth respinning to get
> a proper look at it in context. Some naming bikeshedding below ...
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
>> index 4bd1d47bb9dc..5c0918ed6b80 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
>> @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ struct security_hook_list {
>> struct lsm_static_call *scalls;
>> union security_list_options hook;
>> const struct lsm_id *lsmid;
>> - bool default_enabled;
>> + bool toggleable;
>> } __randomize_layout;
>
> How about inverting the boolean and using something like 'fixed'
> instead of 'toggleable'?
>
I would prefer not changing the all the other LSM_HOOK_INIT calls as we change the default behaviour then. How about calling it "dynamic"
LSM_HOOK_INIT_DYNAMIC and call the boolean dynamic
- KP
> --
> paul-moore.com
