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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:50:51 -0600
From:	Joy Latten <>
To:	James Morris <>
Cc:	David Miller <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Add security check before flushing SAD/SPD

On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 19:49 -0400, James Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Joy Latten wrote:
> > > I would look at this patch differently if there were some
> > > security level key being checked for a match here, which is
> > > an input key to the flush, but that is not what is happening
> > > here as the object is being looked at by itself.
> > 
> > Yes, I understand what you are saying.
> > I was concerned about having to check each entry
> > to flush database.
> > 
> > I did this patch because we check for authorization
> > when deleting single specified entries from the SAD/SPD. It
> > seem like a hole to me that we check for this, but that same
> > user/process can delete the entire database with no checks.
> Indeed.  Removing an entry is modifying MAC policy, which requires 
> appropriate authorization.
> The security label is encapsulated with the object, which is why it's 
> passed to the security layer.
> Perhaps a better semantic would be to fail the entire flush operation if 
> one of the security checks failed.  e.g. loop through for permissions 
> first, then if all ok, loop through for deletion.
Ok, will code this up and test it if there are no objections.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists