linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v14 0/6] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 05 Sep 2013 23:44:55 -0700
From:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
CC:	LKLM <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	SE Linux <selinux@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 0/6] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

On 9/5/2013 11:48 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
>> On 8/6/2013 3:36 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
>>>> On 8/5/2013 11:30 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
>>>>>> The /proc/*/attr interfaces are given to one LSM. This can be
>>>>>> done by setting CONFIG_SECURITY_PRESENT. Additional interfaces
>>>>>> have been created in /proc/*/attr so that each LSM has its own
>>>>>> named interfaces. The name of the presenting LSM can be read from
>>>>> For me, this is one problem that was bothering me, but it was a cosmetic
>>>>> one that I'd mentioned before: I really disliked the /proc/$pid/attr
>>>>> interface being named "$lsm.$file". I feel it's important to build
>>>>> directories in attr/ for each LSM. So, I spent time to figure out a way to
>>>>> do this. This patch changes the interface to /proc/$pid/attr/$lsm/$file
>>>>> instead, which I feel has a much more appealing organizational structure.
>>>> I will confess that the reason I went with <lsm>.current instead of
>>>> <lsm>/current was that the former was easier to implement.
>>> Yeah, that's totally fine. It wasn't very obvious (to me) how to
>>> implement this initially, so no problem at all. I'm glad there was
>>> something more than bug fixes I could contribute to this series. :)
>> Oh dear. I'm rebasing for 3.12 and the macros don't generate compiling
>> code any longer. It seems that, among other things, readdir is no longer
>> a member of file_operations.
> Looks like f0c3b5093addc8bfe9fe3a5b01acb7ec7969eafa is what touched
> fs/proc/base.c and it should just need a few tweaks from "readdir"
> becoming "iterate", and the prototype changing.
>
> So it should just require bump the macros a little. Let's see if gmail
> eats my paste...
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
> index 4c80ffd..f670349 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
> @@ -2358,17 +2358,17 @@ static const struct file_operations proc_pid_attr_operat
>  };
>
>  #define LSM_DIR_OPS(LSM) \
> -static int proc_##LSM##_attr_dir_readdir(struct file * filp, \
> -                            void * dirent, filldir_t filldir) \
> +static int proc_##LSM##_attr_dir_iterate(struct file * filp, \
> +                            struct dir_context *ctx) \
>  { \
> -       return proc_pident_readdir(filp, dirent, filldir, \
> +       return proc_pident_readdir(filp, ctx, \
>                                    LSM##_attr_dir_stuff, \
>                                    ARRAY_SIZE(LSM##_attr_dir_stuff)); \
>  } \
>  \
>  static const struct file_operations proc_##LSM##_attr_dir_ops = { \
>         .read           = generic_read_dir, \
> -       .readdir        = proc_##LSM##_attr_dir_readdir, \
> +       .iterate        = proc_##LSM##_attr_dir_iterate, \
>         .llseek         = default_llseek, \
>  }; \
>  \
>
>
> Do you have the rest of the series already ported to 3.12?
>
> -Kees
>
Yes, but I did it last week before my holiday started, and have not updated since.
I will become active again upon my return. I hope to have the 3.12 version posted
before the Security Summit.

--
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/