On 29/03/2017 12:35, Djalal Harouni wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> @@ -25,6 +30,9 @@ struct seccomp_filter;
>> struct seccomp {
>> int mode;
>> struct seccomp_filter *filter;
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER) && defined(CONFIG_SECURITY_LANDLOCK)
>> + struct landlock_events *landlock_events;
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER && CONFIG_SECURITY_LANDLOCK */
>> };
>
> Sorry if this was discussed before, but since this is mean to be a
> stackable LSM, I'm wondering if later you could move the events from
> seccomp, and go with a security_task_alloc() model [1] ?
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] http://kernsec.org/pipermail/linux-security-module-archive/2017-March/000184.html
>
Landlock use the seccomp syscall to attach a rule to a process and using
struct seccomp to store this rule make sense. There is currently no way
to store multiple task->security, which is needed for a stackable LSM
like Landlock, but we could move the events there if needed in the future.
Mickaël
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
