On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 08:45:52 AM Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 7/30/2013 2:47 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Thursday, July 25, 2013 11:32:23 AM Casey Schaufler wrote: > >> Subject: [PATCH v14 5/6] LSM: SO_PEERSEC configuration options > >> > >> Refine the handling of SO_PEERSEC to enable legacy > >> user space runtimes, Fedora in particular, when running > >> with multiple LSMs that are capable of providing information > >> using getsockopt(). This introduces an additional configuration > >> option, and requires that the default be the legacy behavior. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > ... > > > >> --- a/security/Kconfig > >> +++ b/security/Kconfig > >> @@ -157,17 +157,49 @@ config SECMARK_LSM > >> > >> help > >> > >> The name of the LSM to use with the networking secmark > >> > >> -config SECURITY_PLAIN_CONTEXT > >> - bool "Backward compatable contexts without lsm='value' formatting" > >> - depends on SECURITY_SELINUX || SECURITY_SMACK > >> - default y > >> +choice > >> + depends on SECURITY && (SECURITY_SELINUX || SECURITY_SMACK) > >> + prompt "Peersec LSM" > >> + default PEERSEC_SECURITY_FIRST > >> + > >> > >> help > >> > >> - Without this value set security context strings will > >> - include the name of the lsm with which they are associated > >> - even if there is only one LSM that uses security contexts. > >> - This matches the way contexts were handled before it was > >> - possible to have multiple concurrent security modules. > >> - If you are unsure how to answer this question, answer Y. > >> + Select the security module that will send attribute > >> + information in IP header options. > >> + Most SELinux configurations do not take advantage > >> + of Netlabel, while all Smack configurations do. Unless > >> + there is a need to do otherwise chose Smack in preference > >> + to SELinux. > > > > I'm not hugely in love with the help text; the first sentence seems to be > > all that is needed, the second seems unnecessary and not exactly fair to > > the LSMs. > > I can take out the "friendly advice". What it really should say > is more on the lines of: > > If you have gotten to the point where you have to make > this decision you should probably call it a work day, go > home, have a nice drink and spend some time with a loved > one. In the morning take a good hard look at your network > configuration. You may end up with a different security > policies being enforced with IPv4 and IPv6 communications. Perfect ;) -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
