| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 00:28:30 +0200 From: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> Cc: jjohansen@...e.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, Tony Jones <tonyj@...e.de>, Dave Hansen <hansendc@...ibm.com> Subject: Re: [AppArmor 01/44] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook On Saturday 30 June 2007 11:29, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 04:07:57PM -0700, jjohansen@...e.de wrote: > > This is needed for computing pathnames in the AppArmor LSM. > > Please see the various per-mountpoint r/o thread that NACKed all the > vfsmount additions and have the rationale for it. The per-mountpoint flags can be checked at the vfs level instead of checking down in the filesystems. That's all pretty nice; it avoids a number of problems. (I think the latest patches of Dave Hansen are archived at http://lwn.net/Articles/239630/.) The lSM hooks are a rather different story: we cannot move LSM functionality into the vfs without breaking the LSM abstraction. LSMs already are not agnostic of vfsmount anymore right now. They are free to use the additional vfsmounts, or just ignore them. So what are the specific issues you have with this? 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists