linux-kernel - Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

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]

Message-Id: <200706041325.30817.agruen@suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 4 Jun 2007 13:25:30 +0200
From:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	jjohansen@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

On Monday 04 June 2007 12:55, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2007-05-23 18:16:45, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:14, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Why is this configurable?
> >
> > The maximum length of a pathname is an arbitrary limit: we don't want to
> > allocate arbitrary amounts of of kernel memory for pathnames so we
> > introduce this limit and set it to a reasonable value. In the unlikely
> > case that someone uses insanely long pathnames, this limit can be
> > increased.
>
> vfs does not have configurable pathname limit, and I do not see what
> is so special about AA to require this kind of uglyness.

You very well know that the vfs has a limit of PATH_MAX characters (4096) for 
pathnames. This means that at most that many characters can be passed at 
once. 

I've really got enough of your perpetual unfounded rants.
-
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/