[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100123230735.GW19799@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 23:07:35 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
David Safford <safford@...son.ibm.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Fix 1 untangling ima mess, part 2 with counters
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:35:40PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> The "Untangling ima mess, part 2 with counters" patch messed
> up the counters. Based on conversations with Al Viro, this patch
> streamlines ima_path_check() by removing the counter maintaince.
> The counters are now updated independently, from measuring the file,
> in __dentry_open() and alloc_file() by calling ima_counts_get().
> ima_path_check() is called from nfsd and do_filp_open().
>
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>
> ---
> fs/namei.c | 4 +-
> include/linux/ima.h | 4 +-
> security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 234 ++++++++++++++-----------------------
Um...
a) where's the nfsd part?
b) will that work if we open file with O_WRONLY?
nfsd side of things is non-trivial. Note that you have that thing called
an awful lot; nfsd_permission() is called by fh_verify(). For which
operations do you really want it to happen? Should it just migrate to
nfsd_open()?
--
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