linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next 0/2] lsm: Change inode

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230530142826.GA9376@lst.de>
Date:   Tue, 30 May 2023 16:28:26 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
        Xiu Jianfeng <xiujianfeng@...wei.com>,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, dhowells@...hat.com, code@...icks.com,
        hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp, linkinjeon@...nel.org,
        sfrench@...ba.org, senozhatsky@...omium.org, tom@...pey.com,
        chuck.lever@...cle.com, jlayton@...nel.org, miklos@...redi.hu,
        paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
        stephen.smalley.work@...il.com, eparis@...isplace.org,
        casey@...aufler-ca.com, dchinner@...hat.com,
        john.johansen@...onical.com, mcgrof@...nel.org,
        mortonm@...omium.org, fred@...udflare.com, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        nathanl@...ux.ibm.com, gnoack3000@...il.com,
        roberto.sassu@...wei.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cachefs@...hat.com,
        ecryptfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org,
        wangweiyang2@...wei.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/2] lsm: Change inode_setattr() to take struct

On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 03:58:35PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> The main concern which was expressed on other patchsets before is that
> modifying inode operations to take struct path is not the way to go.
> Passing struct path into individual filesystems is a clear layering
> violation for most inode operations, sometimes downright not feasible,
> and in general exposing struct vfsmount to filesystems is a hard no. At
> least as far as I'm concerned.

Agreed.  Passing struct path into random places is not how the VFS works.

> So the best way to achieve the landlock goal might be to add new hooks

What is "the landlock goal", and why does it matter?

> or not. And we keep adding new LSMs without deprecating older ones (A
> problem we also face in the fs layer.) and then they sit around but
> still need to be taken into account when doing changes.

Yes, I'm really worried about th amount of LSMs we have, and the weird
things they do.