Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] xen/xsm: Cleanup in preparation for XSM SILO mode

[Doug Goldstein <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 07:16:08AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 26.06.18 at 14:42, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 26/06/18 13:04, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>>> On 26.06.18 at 13:09, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> Future changes will introduce a new SILO mode, which is intended to be 
> >>> useful
> >>> for cloud and enterprise setups where all domUs are unprivileged and have 
> >>> no
> >>> buisness communicating directly.
> >>>
> >>> This was discussed at XenSummit, but I'll leave further details to the 
> >>> series
> >>> which introduces it.  However, to begin with, clean up the XSM 
> >>> namespacing to
> >>> better separate XSM and FLASK.
> >>>
> >>> No functional change.
> >>>
> >>> Andrew Cooper (2):
> >>>   xen/xsm: Rename CONFIG_FLASK_* to CONFIG_XSM_FLASK_*
> >>>   xen/xsm: Rename CONIFIG_XSM_POLICY to CONFIG_XSM_FLASK_POLICY
> >> I don't particularly mind the change, but I also don't view it as
> >> particularly useful: For the first patch I'd see the point if you
> >> meant to introduce some CONFIG_ABC_FLASK, but that's not how
> >> I understand the description there. For the second I don't see
> >> the point of retaining XSM in the name.
> > 
> > XSM != Flask, and this is the naming confusion trying to be rectified.
> 
> But why is FLASK alone not meaningful enough?

Thoughout the code and docs there are conflations between XSM and FLASK
when they're distict pieces of code. FLASK is akin to SELinux while XSM
is akin to the LSM in Linux. To use the Linux paradigms their config
options are:

CONFIG_SECURITY - enables LSMs
CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX - enables SELinux

We're going to have similar menus to allow someone to select a different
XSM implmentation.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel