[PATCH v2] lsm: adds process attribute getter for Landlock

[Jeff Xu]

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 12:56 PM Paul Moore <paul at paul-moore.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 5:26 PM Casey Schaufler <casey at schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
> > On 5/18/2023 1:45 PM, Shervin Oloumi wrote:
> > > Adds a new getprocattr hook function to the Landlock LSM, which tracks
> > > the landlocked state of the process. This is invoked when user-space
> > > reads /proc/[pid]/attr/domain
> >
> > Please don't add a Landlock specific entry directly in the attr/
> > directory. Add it only to attr/landlock.
> >
> > Also be aware that the LSM maintainer (Paul Moore) wants to move
> > away from the /proc/.../attr interfaces in favor of a new system call,
> > which is in review.
>
> What Casey said above.
>
> There is still some uncertainty around timing, and if we're perfectly
> honest, acceptance of the new syscalls at the Linus level, but yes, I
> would very much like to see the LSM infrastructure move away from
> procfs and towards a syscall API.  Part of the reasoning is that the
> current procfs API is ill-suited to handle the multiple, stacked LSMs
> and the other part being the complexity of procfs in a namespaced
> system.  If the syscall API is ultimately rejected, we will need to
> revisit the idea of a procfs API, but even then I think we'll need to
> make some changes to the current approach.
>
> As I believe we are in the latter stages of review for the syscall
> API, perhaps you could take a look and ensure that the current
> proposed API works for what you are envisioning with Landlock?
>
Which review/patch to look for the proposed API ?
I guess ChromeOS will need to backport to 5.10 when the proposal is accepted.

Thanks
-Jeff


> --
> paul-moore.com