linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] NFSv4: Add label recommended attribute and NFSv4 flags

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:	Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:55:54 -0500
From:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
To:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc:	"David P. Quigley" <dpquigl@...ho.nsa.gov>, hch@...radead.org,
	viro@....linux.org.uk, trond.myklebust@....uio.no,
	bfields@...ldses.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] NFSv4: Add label recommended attribute and NFSv4
	flags


On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 12:52 +1100, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, David P. Quigley wrote:
> 
> > +#define NFS4_MAXLABELLEN	255
> 
> I remember raising this before, but I think we need to try and find a 
> better way to implement this than always allocating labels of a fixed and 
> possibly too-small size.
> 
> What about perhaps starting with a statically allocated array of say 64 
> bytes (I can't see any labels on my system larger than that), and then 
> falling back to a a dynamic allocation of up to 32k if it turns out to be 
> too small ?  i.e. large labels are a slow path and there is no practical 
> limit on label size.

Yes, that would be my preference as well - there shouldn't be any
internal limits on the label size.

-- 
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency

--
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/