LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@us.ibm.com>, akpm <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH -next] security/audit/ima: fix build error
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:54:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090212095414.733dd248.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OFF3345B15.9471295A-ON8525755A.00024CFE-8525755A.0002C8E8@us.ibm.com>
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 19:30:24 -0500 Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote on 02/10/2009 05:40:50 PM:
>
> > Hi Randy,
> >
> > On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:55:12 -0800 Randy Dunlap
> <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dropped trees (temporarily):
> > > > audit (difficult conflicts)
> > >
> > > Maybe this is fixed by the dropped audit tree?
> >
> > The audit tree is Al Viro's (cc'd). But I *think* everything in it has
> > been applied upstream.
> >
> > > linux-next-20090210/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:111: error:
> implicit
> > declaration of function 'security_audit_rule_match'
> > > linux-next-20090210/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:230: error:
> implicit
> > declaration of function 'security_audit_rule_init'
> > >
> > > when
> > > CONFIG_SECURITY=y
> > > CONFIG_AUDIT=n
> > > CONFIG_IMA=y
> > > CONFIG_IMA_AUDIT=y
> >
> > This looks more like a security subsystem than audit to me?
>
> These are the IMA Kconfig rules:
> CONFIG_IMA=y
> CONFIG_IMA_MEASURE_PCR_IDX=10
> CONFIG_IMA_AUDIT=y
> CONFIG_IMA_LSM_RULES=y
>
> CONFIG_IMA_LSM_RULES requires the audit subsystem. The default
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> measurement policy is not defined terms of the LSM extended
> attributes, and thus is not required.
This config still fails to build in linux-next-20090212. And the ^^^
statement above may be correct, but it's not enforced in Kconfig, so let's
do that, OK?
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
IMA_LSM_RULES requires AUDIT. This is automatic if SECURITY_SELINUX=y
but not when SECURITY_SMACK=y (and SECURITY_SELINUX=n), so make the
dependency explicit. This fixes the following build error:
security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:111:error: implicit declaration of function 'security_audit_rule_match'
security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:230:error: implicit declaration of function 'security_audit_rule_init'
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
---
security/integrity/ima/Kconfig | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- linux-next-20090212.orig/security/integrity/ima/Kconfig
+++ linux-next-20090212/security/integrity/ima/Kconfig
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ config IMA_AUDIT
config IMA_LSM_RULES
bool
- depends on IMA && (SECURITY_SELINUX || SECURITY_SMACK)
+ depends on IMA && AUDIT && (SECURITY_SELINUX || SECURITY_SMACK)
default y
help
- Disabling this option will disregard LSM based policy rules
+ Disabling this option will disregard LSM based policy rules.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-12 17:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-10 8:41 linux-next: Tree for February 10 Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-10 9:23 ` next Feb 10: mm/slqb build break Sachin P. Sant
2009-02-10 9:54 ` Sachin P. Sant
2009-02-10 11:53 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-02-12 1:45 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-12 1:47 ` David Miller
2009-02-12 11:28 ` Sachin P. Sant
2009-02-10 10:30 ` Next Feb 10 : build/break arch/s390kernel.irq.o Sachin P. Sant
2009-02-10 11:15 ` [Patch] [s390] Fix init irq proc build break Sachin P. Sant
2009-02-10 11:40 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-02-10 10:45 ` Next Feb 10 build break on s390 : mm/shmem.c Sachin P. Sant
2009-02-10 13:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2009-02-10 19:55 ` linux-next: Tree for February 10 (security/audit/ima) Randy Dunlap
2009-02-10 22:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-11 0:30 ` Mimi Zohar
2009-02-12 17:54 ` Randy Dunlap [this message]
2009-02-12 18:24 ` [PATCH -next] security/audit/ima: fix build error Mimi Zohar
2009-02-12 18:30 ` Randy Dunlap
2009-02-12 22:31 ` James Morris
2009-02-11 1:29 ` linux-next: Tree for February 10 (security/audit/ima) Al Viro
2009-02-11 2:27 ` Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090212095414.733dd248.randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--to=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=zohar@us.ibm.com \
--subject='Re: [PATCH -next] security/audit/ima: fix build error' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).