Re: [PATCH v2 security-next 1/4] security: Hornet LSM

[Blaise Boscaccy]

Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> History repeats itself.
> 1. the problem is hard.
> 2. you're only interested in addressing your own use case.
> There is no end-to-end design here and no attempt to
> think it through how it will work for others.
>

Well, I suppose anything worth doing is going to be hard :)

The end-to-end design for this is the same end-to-end design that exists
for signing kernel modules today. We envisioned it working for others
the same way module signing works for others. 

> Hacking into bpf internal objects like maps is not acceptable.

We've heard your concerns about kern_sys_bpf and we agree that the LSM
should not be calling it. The proposal in this email should meet both of
our needs
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/874iypjl8t.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/


-blaise