[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48E45672.5030606@nttdata.co.jp>
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:04:50 +0900
From: Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
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.
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?
Regards,
--
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