linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Introduce new LSM hooks where vfsmount is available.

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: <1222182167.28396.11.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>
Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:02:47 -0400
From:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
To:	david@...g.hm
Cc:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Toshiharu Harada <haradats@...data.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce new LSM hooks where vfsmount is available.


On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 23:12 -0700, david@...g.hm wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008, James Morris wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 17 Sep 2008, Kentaro Takeda wrote:
> >
> >> TOMOYO Linux needs method for calculating pathname in LSM module.
> >> However, we have received comment from Al Viro, the vfs maintainer,
> >> that adding vfsmount parameter to vfs helper functions (and LSM hooks)
> >> is not preferable. We have asked some people (including Al), and we
> >> came back to the most straightforward approach; adding new LSM hooks
> >> where vfsmount is available.
> >>
> >> The attached patch introduces several new LSM hooks TOMOYO Linux
> >> needs. It has less impact to existing LSM module and no impact to vfs
> >> helper functions. Please review it.
> >
> > I don't see any technical errors in this patch.
> >
> > If it is going to be merged, please make a new config option for
> > path-based hooks (similar to that for the network hooks), so they can be
> > compiled out.
> 
> one question about these new hook locations.
> 
> it is possible to gather all the info that was gathered at the old hook 
> locations from the new ones? I realize that you are not eliminating the 
> old hooks (and possibly can't for backwards compatibility), but possibly 
> they should be depriciated in favor of the new locations if they can 
> satisfy both the old uses and new use cases.

They can't.

-- 
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/