On Wed, 2018-04-18 at 09:09 -0700, John Johansen wrote: > On 04/13/2018 09:25 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > [Cc'ing John Johansen] > > > > On Tue, 2018-03-27 at 18:01 -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > [...] > >> As such I expect the best way to create the ima namespace is by simply > >> writing to securityfs/imafs. Possibly before the user namespace is > >> even unshared. That would allow IMA to keep track of things from > >> before a container is created. > > > > I do think this is generally the right approach for LSMs when looking > forward to LSM stacking and more LSMs. > > > > My initial thought was to stage IMA namespacing with just IMA-audit > > first, followed by either IMA-measurement or IMA-appraisal. This > > would allow us to get the basic IMA namespacing framework working and > > defer dealing with the securityfs related namespacing of the IMA > > policy and measurement list issues to later. > > > > By tying IMA namespacing to a securityfs ima/unshare file, we would > > need to address the securityfs issues first. > > > > well it depends on what you want to do. It would be possible to have > a simple file (not a jump link) within securityfs that IMA could use > without having to deal with all the securityfs issues first. However it > does require that securityfs (not necessarily imafs) be visible within > the mount namespace of the task doing the setup. Eric, would you be OK with that? Mimi
