From: Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp•com>
To: James Morris <jmorris@namei•org>
Cc: vyekkirala@TrustedCS•com, netdev@vger•kernel.org,
selinux@tycho•nsa.gov, sds@tycho•nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mlsxfrm: Various fixes
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 01:39:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4552CD3B.40809@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611090109120.10907@d.namei>
James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Paul Moore wrote:
>
>>James Morris wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>
>>>>1. Functionality is available right now, no additional kernel changes needed
>>>>2. No special handling for localhost, I tend to like the idea of having
>>>>consistent behavior for all addresses/interfaces
>>>
>>>I don't agree. SO_PEERSEC should always just work for loopback, just like
>>>with Unix sockets.
>>
>>My main concern is that we would have "special" behavior for a single IP address
>> and that this behavior wouldn't be subject to the same labeled networking
>>configuration/management methods as the rest of the address space.
>
> It's a very special case, and loopack networking has lots of special case
> handling because of this. It's nearly zero cost to have this work, and
> then you get full SELinux control over local IP communications.
It sounds like you have an idea of how you would like to see this implemented,
can you give me a rough outline? Is this the partitioned SECMARK field you
talked about earlier?
I'm asking because the only localhost SO_PEERSEC mechanism that I have seen that
didn't require explicit packet labeling was the secid approach which I think we
gave up on ...
--
paul moore
linux security @ hp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-09 6:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-07 17:17 [PATCH 2/3] mlsxfrm: Various fixes Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-07 20:38 ` James Morris
2006-11-08 14:31 ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-09 4:08 ` Paul Moore
2006-11-09 4:38 ` James Morris
2006-11-09 4:59 ` Paul Moore
2006-11-09 6:15 ` James Morris
2006-11-09 6:39 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2006-11-09 7:02 ` James Morris
2006-11-09 17:26 ` Paul Moore
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4552CD3B.40809@hp.com \
--to=paul.moore@hp$(echo .)com \
--cc=jmorris@namei$(echo .)org \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho$(echo .)nsa.gov \
--cc=selinux@tycho$(echo .)nsa.gov \
--cc=vyekkirala@TrustedCS$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox