linux-kernel - Re: [patch 07/22] fat: dont call notify

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:	Sat, 17 May 2008 06:01:32 -0700
From:	Brad Boyer <flar@...andria.com>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	hch@...radead.org, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, ezk@...sunysb.edu,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 07/22] fat: dont call notify_change

On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 08:56:39AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > The FAT_IOCTL_SET_ATTRIBUTES ioctl() calls notify_change() to change
> > > the file mode before changing the inode attributes.  Replace with
> > > explicit calls to security_inode_setattr(), fat_setattr() and
> > > fsnotify_change().
> > >
> > > This is equivalent to the original.  The reason it is needed, is that
> > > later in the series we move the immutable check into notify_change().
> > > That would break the FAT_IOCTL_SET_ATTRIBUTES ioctl, as it needs to
> > > perform the mode change regardless of the immutability of the file.
> > 
> > Don't we need to add EXPORT_SYMBOL(security_inode_setattr)?
> 
> Yes we do, thanks for noticing.  Committed the below patch to the
> vfs-cleanups tree.
> ----
> Index: linux-2.6/security/security.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/security/security.c	2008-05-14 12:49:42.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6/security/security.c	2008-05-17 08:46:52.000000000 +0200
> @@ -476,6 +476,7 @@ int security_inode_setattr(struct dentry
>  		return 0;
>  	return security_ops->inode_setattr(dentry, attr);
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(security_inode_setattr);

Is there any particular reason you made it EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? It seems
like this is replacing functionality that was previously exported
without a GPL tag. I won't argue forcefully for changing it, but I
did want to mention it on the list. I understand people wanting to
make new functionality tagged that way (even though I disagree), but
this doesn't seem to fit either the notion of an internal thing that
shouldn't be touched or new functionality.

	Brad Boyer
	flar@...andria.com

--
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/