[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1571854155.5104.157.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 14:09:15 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>,
dhowells@...hat.com, casey@...aufler-ca.com, sashal@...nel.org,
jamorris@...ux.microsoft.com,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
keyrings@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 6/6] KEYS: measure keys when they are created or
updated
On Tue, 2019-10-22 at 17:18 -0700, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> index 250ee2d76406..707a9e7fa94d 100644
> --- a/security/security.c
> +++ b/security/security.c
> @@ -2303,6 +2303,16 @@ int security_key_getsecurity(struct key *key, char **_buffer)
> return call_int_hook(key_getsecurity, 0, key, _buffer);
> }
>
> +int security_key_create_or_update(struct key *keyring,
> + struct key *key,
> + const struct cred *cred,
> + unsigned long flags,
> + bool create)
> +{
> + return ima_post_key_create_or_update(keyring, key, cred,
> + flags, create);
> +}
> +
> #endif /* CONFIG_KEYS */
Either the new hook is an LSM and IMA hook, or it is just an IMA hook.
We don't define a security_ function, if it is just an IMA hook.
Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists