linux-kernel - Re: [d_path 0/7] Fixes to d

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:	Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:30:08 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
Cc:	jjohansen@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, chrisw@...s-sol.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [d_path 0/7] Fixes to d_path: Respin

> As far as I can see, glibc internally looks at /proc/mounts (or else mtab) to
> find out where tmpfs is mounted for opening files there, and to look up
> filesystem information for statfs(), while accessing that path, too. Fstatfs()
> also looks into the same files, but it only matches by filesystem type, so this
> is only a very unreliable heuristic, anyway.
> 
> So judging from that, glibc users should be fine.

So glibc does use it and you will change behaviour

> > I disagree - firstly because of not breaking stuff, and secondly because
> > it separates two discussions - merging AppArmor being one of them , and
> > the correct behaviour for getcwd & /proc/mounts being the other.
> 
> I agree with the separation of discussion argument. Here are patches that
> change getcwd() and /proc/mounts independent of the changes that AppArmor
> depends on.

More useful would be AppArmour without the changes to getcwd
and /proc/mounts
-
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/