linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] eCryptfs: Netlink functions for public key

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:02:37 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@...ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tchicks@...ibm.com,
	tshighla@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] eCryptfs: Netlink functions for public key

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:18:37 -0500
Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@...ibm.com> wrote:

> > - _why_ does it use netlink?
> 
> Netlink provides the transport mechanism that would minimize the
> complexity of the implementation, given that we can have multiple
> daemons (one per user). I explored the possibility of using relayfs,
> but that would involve having to introduce control channels and a
> protocol for creating and tearing down channels for the daemons. We do
> not have to worry about any of that with netlink.

I'd have thought that a more appropriate communication mechanism would be
something which uses a file descriptor: a pipe, or a /dev node or whatever.

That way, the endpoints are more tightly defined and the
daemon-didnt-send-quit problem gets solved.  In fact, the quit message
might become unneeded: just use close()?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/