| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:04:19 +0100 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, miklos@...redi.hu, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Selinux@...ho.nsa.gov, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] SELinux: Handle opening of a unioned file Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov> wrote: > > + /* We need to check that the union file is allowed to be opened as well > > + * as checking that the lower file is allowed to be opened. > > Hmm...so if I try to open a file for write access, then we are going to > require that the process be allowed to write to both the union/overlay > inode and to the lower inode? That seems problematic for the containers > use case where no write access will be granted to the lower files. Actually, this comment should probably be deleted. I am currently thinking that access through the overlay fs should only be mediated by the label on the overlay inode and should not involve the lower inode. Possibly, then the lower file label should be reckoned against the label of whoever created the *mount*. David -- 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