On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 07:40:33PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 08:38:21PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > > There is also the use case of noexec mounts and file permissions. From > > user space point of view, it doesn't matter which kernel component is in > > charge of defining the policy. The syscall should then not be tied with > > a verification/integrity/signature/appraisal vocabulary, but simply an > > access control one. > > permission()? int lsm(int fd, const char *how, char *error, int size); Seriously, this is "ask LSM to apply special policy to file"; let's _not_ mess with flags, etc. for that; give it decent bandwidth and since it's completely opaque for the rest of the kernel, just a pass a string to be parsed by LSM as it sees fit.
