On 2/11/2019 2:54 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > To avoid potential confusion, explicitly ignore "security=" when "lsm=" is > used on the command line, and report that it is happening. > > Suggested-by: Tetsuo Handa <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]> > --- > security/security.c | 8 ++++++-- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c > index 3147785e20d7..e6153ed54361 100644 > --- a/security/security.c > +++ b/security/security.c > @@ -288,9 +288,13 @@ static void __init ordered_lsm_init(void) > ordered_lsms = kcalloc(LSM_COUNT + 1, sizeof(*ordered_lsms), > GFP_KERNEL); > > - if (chosen_lsm_order) > + if (chosen_lsm_order) { > + if (chosen_major_lsm) { > + pr_info("security= is ignored because of lsm=\n");
This is a little awkward. How about "lsm= supersedes security=". > + chosen_major_lsm = NULL; > + } > ordered_lsm_parse(chosen_lsm_order, "cmdline"); > - else > + } else > ordered_lsm_parse(builtin_lsm_order, "builtin"); > > for (lsm = ordered_lsms; *lsm; lsm++)
