From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D7FC04A94 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2023 09:09:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234470AbjHJJJM (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2023 05:09:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33286 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233970AbjHJJIj (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2023 05:08:39 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x132.google.com (mail-lf1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::132]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC3372123 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2023 02:08:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x132.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-4fe3b86cec1so930725e87.2 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2023 02:08:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=semihalf.com; s=google; t=1691658517; x=1692263317; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:cc:to:from :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Xol/W+TvwhMd6CwwK6yrJqAS9Tv78RNFD7MRPU7oFb8=; b=ZRu0XiA9V0IseCnwRNvEo1LfISeMdXM1UxAINjtcjxJhEfoYn84di4Vf4feEnvyjQr YLWyP3ULvjpqTaVDtUpr8YSQj8NWEHB5oKl8plMtJsPjRwwaRGm8mQRB3ptHSV4m2PRn cSZkXXGe1ODstwlN5h/HNWEu9qHRs5bw+OXYzs94NagW5uvFWziudlA4AsDpey7e/i2q K9Vb6tJKP/AnJ5WorlHIhscNzBnEZZ6rLwPYCTUKKVyy66oMvFpJWNRYVLG+Q7CO+CJr B5iudtNyIzushzY9/Lw2XoudjDo90IAFanrTR4G+Zxis52gBKzGVtA5BaNcgzN6pDjd6 Wr7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1691658517; x=1692263317; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:cc:to:from :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Xol/W+TvwhMd6CwwK6yrJqAS9Tv78RNFD7MRPU7oFb8=; b=IxLj90cChxJJaMLij0UwRWdL19dQOPlR1pC5aNceRp/HkUcPBvMMTdbNOyf/kYTRAC IRXgdo1Y0i0fRQVcdTTfrrfqblwNahVGHkxS1P66p6dvd0yNROeN3yL6CV93KFtzBlrN 2yK06514+qQ6Ob5rQSP9jnNpkHTXZO1bPYtR8ieWgpmIrivumo9lLkEieeKXJ4PB8Kah CyVn7trS7+imbuTkFylFid5/r70oxhJZ00snTUU371VthMHBGWP3pl8jkaYIic9TFuWt A+hJ5lBKUjoALHv/I2hSLb3kvSO7/MB5U1pu17UUAvhtLeXllvlJWG6SajYG2fTarARa 7myw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzE5Nvq41dpdq18HE71W+cRJ6QSwjbTMNGNr4GRiG/HYrVvFaS/ hlcCr/uWkpQuSv1njRMN2cvHHg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGHsVD7kNwE0OP5lernztvDqqsgfDrdbPMMQprcfSZ56KzwkpOB3mBxt0B0KFX7TvbYMtw6Fw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:2808:b0:4fe:1f02:e54b with SMTP id cf8-20020a056512280800b004fe1f02e54bmr1743000lfb.56.1691658516875; Thu, 10 Aug 2023 02:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.43.1.246] ([83.142.187.84]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s7-20020a19ad47000000b004fe83d228e4sm203930lfd.71.2023.08.10.02.08.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 10 Aug 2023 02:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6c5157fd-0feb-bce0-c160-f8d89a06f640@semihalf.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 11:08:34 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] Add LSM access controls for io_uring_setup Content-Language: en-US From: Dmytro Maluka To: Paul Moore Cc: Jeffrey Vander Stoep , Gil Cukierman , Jens Axboe , Pavel Begunkov , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Stephen Smalley , Eric Paris , kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org, Joel Granados , Jeff Xu , Takaya Saeki , Tomasz Nowicki , Matteo Rizzo , Andres Freund References: <20221107205754.2635439-1-cukie@google.com> <54c8fd9c-0edd-7fea-fd7a-5618859b0827@semihalf.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 8/9/23 19:28, Dmytro Maluka wrote: > So one of the questions I'm wondering about is: if Android implemented > preventing execution of any io_uring code by non-trusted processes > (via seccomp or any other way), how much would it help to reduce the > risk of attacks, compared to its current SELinux based solution? And why exactly I'm wondering about that: AFAICT, Android folks are concerned about the high likelihood of vulnerabilities in io_uring code just like we (ChromeOS folks) are, and that is the main reason why Android takes care of restricting io_uring usage in the first place.