[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7309.1332946312@jrobl>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 23:51:52 +0900
From: "J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
valerie.aurora@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sds@...ho.nsa.gov, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: copy-up xattr (Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/73] Union Mount [ver #2])
David Howells:
> That's not necessarily good enough. What if and LSM, say SELinux, is in
> force? Now SELinux will happily label the files for you - but there's a
> reasonable chance they won't be correct. OTOH, they may not be correct even
> if they are copied up.
Then what will happen (or should happen) in cp(1) for such cases?
Can the --preserve=context or xattr option handle it correctly?
If cp(1) can hanle it correctly, then union-mount may be able to behave
similarly, or make the internal copy-up operaion a totally isolated
userspace module.
If cp(1) cannot, then union-mount will not either. And union-mount
should delete the copied-up file after the xattr error, while cp(1) may
left the copied file.
Finally, the number of cases which copy-up xattr succeeds may not be so
many, and the situation is similar to cp(1) which copies a file between
different filesystems.
J. R. Okajima
--
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