On Wed, 2023-03-08 at 08:13 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Roberto,
>
> On Fri, 2023-03-03 at 19:25 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Introduce LSM_ORDER_LAST, to satisfy the requirement of LSMs willing to be
> > the last, e.g. the 'integrity' LSM, without changing the kernel command
> > line or configuration.
>
> Please reframe this as a bug fix for 79f7865d844c ("LSM: Introduce
> "lsm=" for boottime LSM selection") and upstream it first, with
> 'integrity' as the last LSM. The original bug fix commit 92063f3ca73a
> ("integrity: double check iint_cache was initialized") could then be
> removed.
Ok, I should complete the patch by checking the cache initialization in
iint.c.
> > As for LSM_ORDER_FIRST, LSMs with LSM_ORDER_LAST are always enabled and put
> > at the end of the LSM list in no particular order.
>
> ^Similar to LSM_ORDER_FIRST ...
>
> And remove "in no particular order".
The reason for this is that I originally thought that the relative
order of LSMs specified in the kernel configuration or the command line
was respected (if more than one LSM specifies LSM_ORDER_LAST). In fact
not. To do this, we would have to parse the LSM string again, as it is
done for LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE LSMs.
Thanks
Roberto
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 1 +
> > security/security.c | 12 +++++++++---
> > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> > index 21a8ce23108..05c4b831d99 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> > @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ extern void security_add_hooks(struct security_hook_list *hooks, int count,
> > enum lsm_order {
> > LSM_ORDER_FIRST = -1, /* This is only for capabilities. */
> > LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE = 0,
> > + LSM_ORDER_LAST = 1,
> > };
> >
> > struct lsm_info {
> > diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> > index 322090a50cd..24f52ba3218 100644
> > --- a/security/security.c
> > +++ b/security/security.c
> > @@ -284,9 +284,9 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_parse(const char *order, const char *origin)
> > bool found = false;
> >
> > for (lsm = __start_lsm_info; lsm < __end_lsm_info; lsm++) {
> > - if (lsm->order == LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE &&
> > - strcmp(lsm->name, name) == 0) {
> > - append_ordered_lsm(lsm, origin);
> > + if (strcmp(lsm->name, name) == 0) {
> > + if (lsm->order == LSM_ORDER_MUTABLE)
> > + append_ordered_lsm(lsm, origin);
> > found = true;
> > }
> > }
> > @@ -306,6 +306,12 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_parse(const char *order, const char *origin)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > + /* LSM_ORDER_LAST is always last. */
> > + for (lsm = __start_lsm_info; lsm < __end_lsm_info; lsm++) {
> > + if (lsm->order == LSM_ORDER_LAST)
> > + append_ordered_lsm(lsm, " last");
> > + }
> > +
> > /* Disable all LSMs not in the ordered list. */
> > for (lsm = __start_lsm_info; lsm < __end_lsm_info; lsm++) {
> > if (exists_ordered_lsm(lsm))
