[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhR2M_MWHs34kn-WH3Wr0sgT09WKveecy7onkFhUb1-gEg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 10:33:42 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org,
chuck.lever@...cle.com, jlayton@...nel.org, neilb@...e.de, kolga@...app.com,
Dai.Ngo@...cle.com, tom@...pey.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, eric.snowberg@...cle.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
jarkko@...nel.org, stephen.smalley.work@...il.com, eparis@...isplace.org,
casey@...aufler-ca.com, shuah@...nel.org, mic@...ikod.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
selinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>, Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/25] security: Introduce file_post_open hook
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 7:59 AM Roberto Sassu
<roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-02-12 at 16:16 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 4:06 PM Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Roberto,
> > >
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> > > > index d9d2636104db..f3d92bffd02f 100644
> > > > --- a/security/security.c
> > > > +++ b/security/security.c
> > > > @@ -2972,6 +2972,23 @@ int security_file_open(struct file *file)
> > > > return fsnotify_perm(file, MAY_OPEN); <=== Conflict
> > >
> > > Replace with "return fsnotify_open_perm(file);"
> > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > >
> > > The patch set doesn't apply cleaning to 6.8-rcX without this change. Unless
> > > there are other issues, I can make the change.
> >
> > I take it this means you want to pull this via the IMA/EVM tree?
>
> Not sure about that, but I have enough changes to do to make a v10.
Sorry, I should have been more clear, the point I was trying to
resolve was who was going to take this patchset (eventually). There
are other patches destined for the LSM tree that touch the LSM hooks
in a way which will cause conflicts with this patchset, and if
you/Mimi are going to take this via the IMA/EVM tree - which is fine
with me - I need to take that into account when merging things in the
LSM tree during this cycle. It's not a big deal either way, it would
just be nice to get an answer on that within the next week.
--
paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists