Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1672425 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Steve Kemp <steve@steve.fi> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-22 10:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-06-22 19:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 4 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[PATCH v2] Moved module init-functions into the module. Steve Kemp <steve@steve.fi> - 2017-06-22 10:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] Moved module init-functions into the module. Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-06-22 19:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] Moved module init-functions into the module. Steve Kemp <steve@steve.fi> - 2017-06-22 19:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] Moved module init-functions into the module. Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> - 2017-06-22 19:00 +0200
| From | Steve Kemp <steve@steve.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-22 10:50 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH v2] Moved module init-functions into the module. |
| Message-ID | <tV5Ym-2e1-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
This commit moves the call to initialize the LSM modules inline
into the LSM-files themselves.
This removes the need to hunt around for the setup, which was
something that bit me when I wrote my own (unrelated) LSM.
Keeping LSM code in one place, including the setup of the
hooks seems like a sane choice.
This patch has been updated to use `security_init`, as per
feedback from Ethan Zhao. This should ensure that the
LSM init is called "early".
Signed-off-by: Steve Kemp <steve@steve.fi>
---
include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 10 ----------
security/loadpin/loadpin.c | 5 ++++-
security/security.c | 2 --
security/yama/yama_lsm.c | 5 ++++-
4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
index 080f34e..a6dbdc7 100644
--- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
+++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
@@ -1936,15 +1936,5 @@ static inline void security_delete_hooks(struct security_hook_list *hooks,
extern int __init security_module_enable(const char *module);
extern void __init capability_add_hooks(void);
-#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_YAMA
-extern void __init yama_add_hooks(void);
-#else
-static inline void __init yama_add_hooks(void) { }
-#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_LOADPIN
-void __init loadpin_add_hooks(void);
-#else
-static inline void loadpin_add_hooks(void) { };
-#endif
#endif /* ! __LINUX_LSM_HOOKS_H */
diff --git a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c
index dbe6efd..127eb5ca 100644
--- a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c
+++ b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c
@@ -179,12 +179,15 @@ static struct security_hook_list loadpin_hooks[] __lsm_ro_after_init = {
LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_read_file, loadpin_read_file),
};
-void __init loadpin_add_hooks(void)
+static int __init loadpin_add_hooks(void)
{
pr_info("ready to pin (currently %sabled)", enabled ? "en" : "dis");
security_add_hooks(loadpin_hooks, ARRAY_SIZE(loadpin_hooks), "loadpin");
+ return 0;
}
+security_initcall(loadpin_add_hooks);
+
/* Should not be mutable after boot, so not listed in sysfs (perm == 0). */
module_param(enabled, int, 0);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(enabled, "Pin module/firmware loading (default: true)");
diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
index b9fea39..110b85b 100644
--- a/security/security.c
+++ b/security/security.c
@@ -67,8 +67,6 @@ int __init security_init(void)
* Load minor LSMs, with the capability module always first.
*/
capability_add_hooks();
- yama_add_hooks();
- loadpin_add_hooks();
/*
* Load all the remaining security modules.
diff --git a/security/yama/yama_lsm.c b/security/yama/yama_lsm.c
index 8298e09..e3c1d10 100644
--- a/security/yama/yama_lsm.c
+++ b/security/yama/yama_lsm.c
@@ -482,9 +482,12 @@ static void __init yama_init_sysctl(void)
static inline void yama_init_sysctl(void) { }
#endif /* CONFIG_SYSCTL */
-void __init yama_add_hooks(void)
+static int __init yama_add_hooks(void)
{
pr_info("Yama: becoming mindful.\n");
security_add_hooks(yama_hooks, ARRAY_SIZE(yama_hooks), "yama");
yama_init_sysctl();
+ return 0;
}
+
+security_initcall(yama_add_hooks);
--
2.1.4
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-22 19:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tVdCy-7lD-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1672425 |
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> wrote: > On 6/22/2017 1:45 AM, Steve Kemp wrote: >> This commit moves the call to initialize the LSM modules inline >> into the LSM-files themselves. >> >> This removes the need to hunt around for the setup, which was >> something that bit me when I wrote my own (unrelated) LSM. >> >> Keeping LSM code in one place, including the setup of the >> hooks seems like a sane choice. > > The module initialization code belongs in the module. > The LSM infrastructure should have an absolute minimum > of module specific information. I would rather see the > "minor" modules (yama, loadpin) changed to use the module > registration scheme used by the "major" modules, but that > will require a mechanism to ensure module ordering, and > we don't have that yet. No, don't do this. Yeah, I agree: initialization order is important here and I don't want to depend on the Makefile for this. -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Kemp <steve@steve.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-22 19:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tVe5A-7Lh-35@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1672827 |
> > The module initialization code belongs in the module. > > The LSM infrastructure should have an absolute minimum > > of module specific information. I would rather see the > > "minor" modules (yama, loadpin) changed to use the module > > registration scheme used by the "major" modules, but that > > will require a mechanism to ensure module ordering, and > > we don't have that yet. No, don't do this. > > Yeah, I agree: initialization order is important here and I don't want > to depend on the Makefile for this. I can appreciate that argument. I did consider it myself, but decided that because the minor modules had such differing goals, and no real functional overlap, in practice that would mean that explicit ordering wasn't a strong requirement. If/when a better registration scheme becomes available then we'll all switch to using it, and that would be great. Thanks for the feedback. I'll not tweak any further. Steve -- https://steve.fi/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-22 19:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tVdCy-7lD-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1672425 |
On 6/22/2017 1:45 AM, Steve Kemp wrote:
> This commit moves the call to initialize the LSM modules inline
> into the LSM-files themselves.
>
> This removes the need to hunt around for the setup, which was
> something that bit me when I wrote my own (unrelated) LSM.
>
> Keeping LSM code in one place, including the setup of the
> hooks seems like a sane choice.
The module initialization code belongs in the module.
The LSM infrastructure should have an absolute minimum
of module specific information. I would rather see the
"minor" modules (yama, loadpin) changed to use the module
registration scheme used by the "major" modules, but that
will require a mechanism to ensure module ordering, and
we don't have that yet. No, don't do this.
>
> This patch has been updated to use `security_init`, as per
> feedback from Ethan Zhao. This should ensure that the
> LSM init is called "early".
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Kemp <steve@steve.fi>
> ---
> include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 10 ----------
> security/loadpin/loadpin.c | 5 ++++-
> security/security.c | 2 --
> security/yama/yama_lsm.c | 5 ++++-
> 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> index 080f34e..a6dbdc7 100644
> --- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> +++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
> @@ -1936,15 +1936,5 @@ static inline void security_delete_hooks(struct security_hook_list *hooks,
>
> extern int __init security_module_enable(const char *module);
> extern void __init capability_add_hooks(void);
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_YAMA
> -extern void __init yama_add_hooks(void);
> -#else
> -static inline void __init yama_add_hooks(void) { }
> -#endif
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_LOADPIN
> -void __init loadpin_add_hooks(void);
> -#else
> -static inline void loadpin_add_hooks(void) { };
> -#endif
>
> #endif /* ! __LINUX_LSM_HOOKS_H */
> diff --git a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c
> index dbe6efd..127eb5ca 100644
> --- a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c
> +++ b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c
> @@ -179,12 +179,15 @@ static struct security_hook_list loadpin_hooks[] __lsm_ro_after_init = {
> LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_read_file, loadpin_read_file),
> };
>
> -void __init loadpin_add_hooks(void)
> +static int __init loadpin_add_hooks(void)
> {
> pr_info("ready to pin (currently %sabled)", enabled ? "en" : "dis");
> security_add_hooks(loadpin_hooks, ARRAY_SIZE(loadpin_hooks), "loadpin");
> + return 0;
> }
>
> +security_initcall(loadpin_add_hooks);
> +
> /* Should not be mutable after boot, so not listed in sysfs (perm == 0). */
> module_param(enabled, int, 0);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(enabled, "Pin module/firmware loading (default: true)");
> diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> index b9fea39..110b85b 100644
> --- a/security/security.c
> +++ b/security/security.c
> @@ -67,8 +67,6 @@ int __init security_init(void)
> * Load minor LSMs, with the capability module always first.
> */
> capability_add_hooks();
> - yama_add_hooks();
> - loadpin_add_hooks();
>
> /*
> * Load all the remaining security modules.
> diff --git a/security/yama/yama_lsm.c b/security/yama/yama_lsm.c
> index 8298e09..e3c1d10 100644
> --- a/security/yama/yama_lsm.c
> +++ b/security/yama/yama_lsm.c
> @@ -482,9 +482,12 @@ static void __init yama_init_sysctl(void)
> static inline void yama_init_sysctl(void) { }
> #endif /* CONFIG_SYSCTL */
>
> -void __init yama_add_hooks(void)
> +static int __init yama_add_hooks(void)
> {
> pr_info("Yama: becoming mindful.\n");
> security_add_hooks(yama_hooks, ARRAY_SIZE(yama_hooks), "yama");
> yama_init_sysctl();
> + return 0;
> }
> +
> +security_initcall(yama_add_hooks);
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web