[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231223153411.GB901@quark.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2023 09:34:11 -0600
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc: Alfred Piccioni <alpic@...gle.com>,
Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
selinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] security: new security_file_ioctl_compat() hook
On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 08:23:26PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> Is it considered valid for a native 64-bit task to use 32-bit
> FS_IO32_XXX flags?
No, that's not valid.
> If not, do we want to remove the FS_IO32_XXX flag
> checks in selinux_file_ioctl()?
I don't see any such flag checks in selinux_file_ioctl().
Is there something else you have in mind?
- Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists