linux-kernel - Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode

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, 25 May 2007 22:00:21 +0200
From:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
To:	casey@...aufler-ca.com
Cc:	Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@....edu>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook

On Friday 25 May 2007 19:43, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> [...] but the AppArmor code could certainly check for that in exec by
> enforcing the argv[0] convention. It would be perfectly reasonable for a
> system that is so dependent on pathnames to require that.

Hmm ... that's a strange idea. AppArmor cannot assume anything about argv[0], 
and it would be a really bad idea to change the well-established semantics of 
argv[0].

There is no actual need for looking at argv[0], though: AppArmor decides based 
on the actual pathname of the executable...

Thanks,
Andreas
-
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/