linux-kernel - Re: [AppArmor 32/44] Enable LSM hooks to distinguish operations on file descriptors from operations on pathnames

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: <Line.LNX.4.64.0706281206180.13250@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:12:07 -0400 (EDT)
From:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To:	John Johansen <jjohansen@...e.de>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>,
	Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [AppArmor 32/44] Enable LSM hooks to distinguish operations on
 file descriptors from operations on pathnames

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, jjohansen@...e.de wrote:

> Struct iattr already contains ia_file since commit cc4e69de from 
> Miklos (which is related to commit befc649c). Use this to pass
> struct file down the setattr hooks. This allows LSMs to distinguish
> operations on file descriptors from operations on paths.

I'm not quite sure I understand this.

Why would you distinguish operations based on whether you have a pathname 
or an inode for an object ?

Are you trying to cater for the case where you're holding an open fd for a 
file which has been deleted, and thus has no pathname?




- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
-
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/