SGX vs LSM (Re: [PATCH v20 00/28] Intel SGX1 support)

[James Morris]

On Wed, 15 May 2019, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

> > Why not just use an xattr, like security.sgx ?
> 
> Wouldn't this make it so that only someone with CAP_MAC_ADMIN could
> install an enclave?  I think that this decision should be left up the
> administrator, and it should be easy to set up a loose policy where
> anyone can load whatever enclave they want.  That's what would happen
> in my proposal if there was no LSM loaded or of the LSM policy didn't
> restrict what .sigstruct files were acceptable.
> 

You could try user.sigstruct, which does not require any privs.

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris at namei.org>