[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080314144209.GF9741@sergelap.austin.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:42:09 -0500
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ch.ncsc.mil>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v2)
Quoting Paul Menage (menage@...gle.com):
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 6:58 AM, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com> wrote:
> > James and Stephen agree with your LSM qualms. I suppose we could add
> > cgroups next to the lsm hooks. I suspect Paul Menage would complain
> > about that (Paul?),
>
> Depends on what you mean by "add cgroups to the LSM hooks". Could you
> expand on that?
cgroup hooks next to the lsm hooks. So in fs/namei.c where there are
security_inode_permission() hooks, there would also be
cgroup_inode_permission() hooks to let the devices cgroup mediate the
access. Well, in permission(), probably not in exec_permission_lite()
since that's probalby not a device access :)
So far it looks like everyone likes that, so as long as you don't nack I
guess that'll be the way to go.
thanks,
-serge
--
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