[PATCH security-next v4 10/32] LSM: Don't ignore initialization failures

Kees Cook keescook at chromium.org
Tue Oct 2 21:38:05 UTC 2018


On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:20 PM, James Morris <jmorris at namei.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
>
>> LSM initialization failures have traditionally been ignored. We should
>> at least WARN when something goes wrong.
>
> I guess we could have a boot param which specifies what to do if any LSM
> fails to init, as I think some folks will want to stop execution at that
> point.
>
> Thoughts?

I'm not opposed, but I won't author it because Linus will yell at me
about introducing a "machine killing" option.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security



More information about the Linux-security-module-archive mailing list