LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* SMACK or SELinux, but not both
@ 2008-02-26  9:09 Alexey Dobriyan
  2008-02-26  9:28 ` James Morris
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alexey Dobriyan @ 2008-02-26  9:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel; +Cc: sds, jmorris, eparis, casey

If SELinux is registered before SMACK, SMACK panics after
register_security() call.

If SMACK is registered before SELinux, SELinux panics after
register_security() call.

Consequently allmodconfig kernel doesn't boot. It would be nice if
some Kconfig magic to exclude each other will be in place.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: SMACK or SELinux, but not both
  2008-02-26  9:09 SMACK or SELinux, but not both Alexey Dobriyan
@ 2008-02-26  9:28 ` James Morris
  2008-02-26 12:39   ` Stephen Smalley
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: James Morris @ 2008-02-26  9:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alexey Dobriyan; +Cc: linux-kernel, sds, eparis, casey

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:

> If SELinux is registered before SMACK, SMACK panics after
> register_security() call.
> 
> If SMACK is registered before SELinux, SELinux panics after
> register_security() call.
> 
> Consequently allmodconfig kernel doesn't boot. It would be nice if
> some Kconfig magic to exclude each other will be in place.

People want to be able to select the security model at boot time, so the 
option to build both LSMs is required.

You can stop SELinux from attempting to register as an LSM via selinux=0, 
which should allow you to boot with just Smack enabled.


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: SMACK or SELinux, but not both
  2008-02-26  9:28 ` James Morris
@ 2008-02-26 12:39   ` Stephen Smalley
  2008-02-28 21:11     ` Bill Davidsen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Smalley @ 2008-02-26 12:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Morris; +Cc: Alexey Dobriyan, linux-kernel, eparis, casey


On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 20:28 +1100, James Morris wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> 
> > If SELinux is registered before SMACK, SMACK panics after
> > register_security() call.
> > 
> > If SMACK is registered before SELinux, SELinux panics after
> > register_security() call.
> > 
> > Consequently allmodconfig kernel doesn't boot. It would be nice if
> > some Kconfig magic to exclude each other will be in place.
> 
> People want to be able to select the security model at boot time, so the 
> option to build both LSMs is required.
> 
> You can stop SELinux from attempting to register as an LSM via selinux=0, 
> which should allow you to boot with just Smack enabled.

Ideally, one could just boot with security=<module> to select the
desired primary security module.  security=smack, security=selinux, or
security=capability.

Having to specify selinux=0 smack=0 foo=0 just to get bar wouldn't be
pretty.  Not that anyone would want to do that, of course...

-- 
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: SMACK or SELinux, but not both
  2008-02-26 12:39   ` Stephen Smalley
@ 2008-02-28 21:11     ` Bill Davidsen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bill Davidsen @ 2008-02-28 21:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen Smalley
  Cc: James Morris, Alexey Dobriyan, linux-kernel, eparis, casey

Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 20:28 +1100, James Morris wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>>
>>> If SELinux is registered before SMACK, SMACK panics after
>>> register_security() call.
>>>
>>> If SMACK is registered before SELinux, SELinux panics after
>>> register_security() call.
>>>
>>> Consequently allmodconfig kernel doesn't boot. It would be nice if
>>> some Kconfig magic to exclude each other will be in place.
>> People want to be able to select the security model at boot time, so the 
>> option to build both LSMs is required.
>>
>> You can stop SELinux from attempting to register as an LSM via selinux=0, 
>> which should allow you to boot with just Smack enabled.
> 
> Ideally, one could just boot with security=<module> to select the
> desired primary security module.  security=smack, security=selinux, or
> security=capability.
> 
> Having to specify selinux=0 smack=0 foo=0 just to get bar wouldn't be
> pretty.  Not that anyone would want to do that, of course...
> 
And doesn't scale well as we add more security models. Oh, that will 
never happen, right? I still like "security="

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2008-02-28 21:08 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-02-26  9:09 SMACK or SELinux, but not both Alexey Dobriyan
2008-02-26  9:28 ` James Morris
2008-02-26 12:39   ` Stephen Smalley
2008-02-28 21:11     ` Bill Davidsen

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).