[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081002133949.GC11150@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 08:39:49 -0500
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To: Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, haradats@...data.co.jp,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [TOMOYO #9 (2.6.27-rc7-mm1) 1/6] LSM adapter functions.
Quoting Kentaro Takeda (takedakn@...data.co.jp):
> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > I suppose you could do something like define both _path and _inode,
> > save away your result from the _path hook but always return 0, there,
> > then if you'd saved off an error and you make it to the _inode hook,
> > return the error there...
> You mean do MAC checks in security_path_*() and return error code of
> security_path_*() in security_inode_*()? Then, method for passing the
> error code to security_inode_*() is a problem.
>
> It was possible to store the error code into current->security->
> something. But now, it is impossible to store the error code into
> current->cred->security->something because current->cred is shared by
> multiple processes. To solve this problem, we everytime need to copy
> current->cred in security_path_*() and we need a new hook called just
> after returning from vfs_* (like mnt_drop_write()) for clearing the
> error code.
>
> Or, another way is to pass the error code as a vfs_*() parameter.
>
> What do you think these approaches?
Just keep your own hash table.
-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