On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 11:09 AM Dmitry Vyukov <dvyu...@google.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 1:23 AM Tetsuo Handa > <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote: > > > > On 2019/01/30 23:45, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > >> Dmitry, is it possible to update configs for linux-next.git , for > > >> we want to test a big change in LSM which will go to Linux 5.1 ? > > >> > > >> TOMOYO security module (CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO=y) can now coexist with > > >> SELinux/Smack/AppArmor security modules, and SafeSetID security module > > >> (CONFIG_SECURITY_SAFESETID=y) was added. Testing with these modules also > > >> enabled might find something... > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > syzbot configs/cmdline args are stored here: > > > https://github.com/google/syzkaller/tree/master/dashboard/config > > > > > > I've tried to update to the latest kernel, the diff is below. > > > Few questions: > > > 1. How are modules enabled now? > > > We pass security=selinux of security=smack on command line. What do we > > > need to pass now to enable several modules at the same time? > > > > Removing security= parameter from kernel boot command line will do it. > > > > security/apparmor/lsm.c: .flags = LSM_FLAG_LEGACY_MAJOR | > > LSM_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE, > > security/selinux/hooks.c: .flags = LSM_FLAG_LEGACY_MAJOR | > > LSM_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE, > > security/smack/smack_lsm.c: .flags = LSM_FLAG_LEGACY_MAJOR | > > LSM_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE, > > security/tomoyo/tomoyo.c: .flags = LSM_FLAG_LEGACY_MAJOR, > > security/security.c: if ((major->flags & > > LSM_FLAG_LEGACY_MAJOR) && > > > > But this means that, if same kernel config/cmdline are used between > > linux-next.git and linux.git (etc.), syzbot will need to choose from > > > > (a) stop sharing kernel cmdline between linux-next.git and linux.git (etc.) > > > > or > > > > (b) stop sharing kernel config between SELinux, Smack and AppArmor > > > > or > > > > (c) start testing after the LSM changes went to linux.git as Linux 5.1-rc1 > > > > . Is (a) or (b) possible? If this is a too much change, (c) will be OK. > > > Thanks for the explanations. > > Here is the change that I've come up with: > https://github.com/google/syzkaller/commit/aa53be276dc84aa8b3825b3416542447ff82b41a > > I've disabled CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO_OMIT_USERSPACE_LOADER (it > actually looked like omitting a user-space loader that I don't have is > the right thing to do, but okay, it indeed does not with =y). > > For now I just enabled TOMOYO and SAFESETID. > I see the problem with making both linux-next and upstream work. If we > use a single config and lsm= cmdline argument, then on upstream all > kernels will use the same module (they won't understand lsm=). But if > we add security= then it will take precedence over lsm= on linux-next, > so we won't get stacked modules. > > Let's go with (c) because I don't want an additional long-term maintenance > cost. > If I understand it correctly later we will need to replace: > security=selinux > security=smack > security=apparmor > > with: > lsm=yama,safesetid,integrity,selinux,tomoyo > lsm=yama,safesetid,integrity,smack,tomoyo > lsm=yama,safesetid,integrity,tomoyo,apparmor
Filed https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/973 to not forget about it.
