New LSM hooks

Casey Schaufler casey at
Wed Feb 6 16:30:00 UTC 2019

On 2/5/2019 5:11 PM, James Morris wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2019, Paul Moore wrote:
>> I believe that will always be a problem, no matter what we do.  The
>> point I was trying to make was that everyone, especially the
>> maintainers, need to watch for this when patches are posted and make
>> sure the patch author posts to the LSM list in addition to any of the
>> relevant LSM specific lists.
> Right, and there is no way a new LSM hook should ever be added to the 
> kernel without review and ack/signoffs from folks on the LSM list 
> (especially those who are maintainers of in-tree LSMs).
> Casey, do you have any examples of this happening?

overlayfs (according to my records - which may be flawed)
is a prime example. Inifiniband hooks were reviewed/acked
for SELinux, but there was never an attempt made to work
with other security module maintainers. Yes, they were posted
to LSM, but under the title "SELinux support for Infiniband".

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