netdev - Re: [PATCH] LSM: Add security_socket_post_accept() and security_socket_post_recv

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

Message-Id: <200904240207.n3O27Sb0096107@www262.sakura.ne.jp>
Date:	Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:07:28 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To:	davem@...emloft.net
Cc:	paul.moore@...com, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, greg@...kko.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LSM: Add security_socket_post_accept() and security_socket_post_recv_datagram().

David Miller wrote:
> People use poll() to avoid -EAGAIN and blocking, they expect the bits
> to tell them what fd's they can work on to do real work.

I found that "man 2 select" says

  Under Linux, select() may report a socket file descriptor as "ready for
  reading", while nevertheless a subsequent read blocks. This could for example
  happen when data has arrived but upon examination has wrong checksum and is
  discarded. There may be other circumstances in which a file descriptor is
  spuriously reported as ready. Thus it may be safer to use O_NONBLOCK on
  sockets that should not block.

  Linux 2.6.16                   2006-03-11                      SELECT(2)

People cannot use "poll()" to avoid blocking.
Applications had better not to completely depend on what poll() says.

> The current proposal is not acceptable.
You don't like TOMOYO's concept. I see.
But I don't see the reason you can't accept this proposal.
What does this proposal break? Please explain me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html