linux-kernel - Re: [patch 01/15] security: pass path to inode

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: <20080602112350.GB8562@parisc-linux.org>
Date:	Mon, 2 Jun 2008 05:23:51 -0600
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	hch@...radead.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
	sds@...ho.nsa.gov, eparis@...hat.com, casey@...aufler-ca.com,
	agruen@...e.de, jjohansen@...e.de,
	penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 01/15] security: pass path to inode_create

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 09:02:14AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> I maintain, that moving lsm hooks into callers is insane.  And that's
> *the* sanest alternative that anybody has been able to come up with to
> passing down vfsmounts into the vfs.

Not so.  I showed how pathname-based security could be done *without*
passing vfsmounts down at all.  Unfortunately, you weren't interested.

-- 
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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/