linux-kernel - RE: [External] Re: [PATCH] selinux: remove redundant msg_msg_alloc

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]

Message-ID: <HK2PR03MB4418F8333938ECB1920F813D923A0@HK2PR03MB4418.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Sun, 12 Jan 2020 15:45:37 +0000
From:   Huaisheng HS1 Ye <yehs1@...ovo.com>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
CC:     Huaisheng Ye <yehs2007@...o.com>,
        Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>,
        "Tzu ting Yu1" <tyu1@...ovo.com>,
        "linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        "selinux@...r.kernel.org" <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [External]  Re: [PATCH] selinux: remove redundant
 msg_msg_alloc_security


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2020 12:50 AM
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:13 AM Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov> wrote:
> > On 1/10/20 4:58 AM, Huaisheng Ye wrote:
> > > From: Huaisheng Ye <yehs1@...ovo.com>
> > >
> > > selinux_msg_msg_alloc_security only calls msg_msg_alloc_security but
> > > do nothing else. And also msg_msg_alloc_security is just used by the
> > > former.
> > >
> > > Remove the redundant function to simplify the code.
> >
> > This seems to also be true of other _alloc_security functions,
> > probably due to historical reasons.  Further, at least some of these
> > functions no longer perform any allocation; they are just
> > initialization functions now that allocation has been taken to the LSM
> > framework, so possibly could be renamed and made to return void at some point.
> 
> I've noticed the same thing on a few occasions, I've just never bothered to put
> the fixes into a patch.  We might as well do that now, at least for the redundant
> code bits; I'll leave the return code issue for another time as that would cross
> LSM boundaries and that really isn't appropriate in the -rc5 timeframe IMHO.
> 
> I'll put something together once I finish up the patch/review backlog from the
> past few days.  Looking quickly with a regex, it would appear that
> inode_alloc_security(), file_alloc_security(), and
> superblock_alloc_security() are all candidates.  While not an allocator, we can
> probably get rid of inode_doinit() as well.

Besides, it looks like selinux_nlmsg_perm is candidate too.
Just send a patch for this function.

Cheers,
Huaisheng Ye