linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -mm 1/4] LSM: Introduce inode_getsecid and ipc

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:	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:04:57 -0500
From:	Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>
To:	"Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com>
Cc:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	akpm <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 1/4] LSM: Introduce inode_getsecid and ipc_getsecid hooks

On Tuesday 26 February 2008 6:24:11 pm Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> Introduce inode_getsecid(inode, secid) and ipc_getsecid(ipcp, secid)
> LSM hooks.
>
> This hooks will be used instead of similar exported SELinux
> interfaces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ahmed S. Darwish <darwish.07@...il.com>
> ---
>
>  include/linux/security.h |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  security/dummy.c         |   12 ++++++++++++
>  security/security.c      |   12 ++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 42 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/security.h b/include/linux/security.h
> index a33fd03..a7fb136 100644
> --- a/include/linux/security.h
> +++ b/include/linux/security.h
> @@ -449,6 +449,10 @@ struct request_sock;
>   *	@dentry is the dentry being changed.
>   *	Return 0 on success.  If error is returned, then the operation
>   *	causing setuid bit removal is failed.
> + * @inode_getsecid:
> + *      Get the secid associated with the node
> + *      @inode contains a pointer to the inode
> + *      @secid contains a pointer to the location to store the
> result *
>   * Security hooks for file operations
>   *
> @@ -989,6 +993,10 @@ struct request_sock;
>   *	@ipcp contains the kernel IPC permission structure
>   *	@flag contains the desired (requested) permission set
>   *	Return 0 if permission is granted.
> + * @ipc_getsecid:
> + *      Get the secid associated with the ipc object
> + *      @ipcp contains the kernel IPC permission structure
> + *      @secid contains a pointer to the location where result will
> be saved

See my other comments about tabs not spaces.

> +static inline void security_inode_getsecid(const struct inode
> *inode, u32 *secid)
> +{ } 

...

> +static inline void security_ipc_getsecid(struct kern_ipc_perm *ipcp,
> u32 *secid)
> +{ } 

Should these both do a  "*secid = 0;"?

> diff --git a/security/dummy.c b/security/dummy.c
> index 6a0056b..c2f4c52 100644
> --- a/security/dummy.c
> +++ b/security/dummy.c
> @@ -422,6 +422,11 @@ static int dummy_inode_listsecurity(struct inode
> *inode, char *buffer, size_t bu return 0;
>  }
>
> +static void dummy_inode_getsecid(const struct inode *inode, u32
> *secid)
> +{ 
> +	return;
> +}

...

> +static void dummy_ipc_getsecid(struct kern_ipc_perm *ipcp, u32
> *secid)
> +{ 
> +	return;
> +}

Same question.

-- 
paul moore
linux security @ hp
--
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/