From: Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:00:09 -0400 > I was just made aware of the skb extension work, and it looks very > appealing from a LSM perspective. As some of you probably remember, > we (the LSM folks) have wanted a proper security blob in the skb for > quite some time, but netdev has been resistant to this idea thus far. > > If I were to propose a patchset to add a SKB_EXT_SECURITY skb > extension (a single extension ID to be shared among the different > LSMs), would that be something that netdev would consider merging, or > is there still a philosophical objection to things like this? Unlike it's main intended user (MPTCP), it sounds like LSM's would use this in a way such that it would be enabled on most systems all the time. That really defeats the whole purpose of making it dynamic. :-/
