[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070609125839.GH27793@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2007 14:58:40 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
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
Subject: Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks
Hi!
> > How will kernel work with very long paths? I'd suspect some problems,
> > if path is 1MB long and I attempt to print it in /proc
> > somewhere.
>
> Pathnames are only used for informational purposes in the kernel, except in
> AppArmor of course. /proc only uses pathnames in a few places,
> but /proc/mounts will silently fail and produce garbage entries. That's not
> ideal of course; we should fix that somehow.
> Note that this has nothing to do with the AppArmor discussion ...
This has everything to do with AA discussion. You took unreliable,
for-user-info kernel subsystem, and made security subsystem depend on
it. Oops.
> > Perhaps vfs should be modified not to allow such crazy paths? But placing
> > limit in aa is ugly.
>
> Dream on. Redefining fundamental vfs semantics is not an option; we should
> rather make sure that we fail gracefully. Considering the
And instead of fixing "too long pathnames are problem in kernel" in
any clean way, you "simply" included
configurable-but-impossible-to-configure-right limit into
apparmor. And now you want that merged. Dream on.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists