[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201001050031.o050VhTU002668@www262.sakura.ne.jp>
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 09:31:43 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: sam@...ack.fr
Cc: serue@...ibm.com, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
kaber@...sh.net, hadi@...erus.ca, zbr@...emap.net,
nhorman@...driver.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/9] Revert "lsm: Remove the socket_post_accept() hook"
Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Samir Bellabes (sam@...ack.fr):
> > This reverts commit 8651d5c0b1f874c5b8307ae2b858bc40f9f02482.
> >
> > snet needs to reintroduce this hook, as it was designed to be: a hook for
> > updating security informations on objects.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Samir Bellabes <sam@...ack.fr>
>
> Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>
>
> (contingent of course on the proposed user actually going in :)
>
> > diff --git a/net/socket.c b/net/socket.c
> > index 8984973..fcd4f2b 100644
> > --- a/net/socket.c
> > +++ b/net/socket.c
> > @@ -1557,6 +1557,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(accept4, int, fd, struct sockaddr __user *, upeer_sockaddr,
> > fd_install(newfd, newfile);
> > err = newfd;
> >
> > + security_socket_post_accept(sock, newsock);
> > +
> > out_put:
> > fput_light(sock->file, fput_needed);
> > out:
I think we should call security_socket_post_accept() before fd_install().
Otherwise, other threads which share fd tables can use
security-informations-not-yet-updated accept()ed sockets.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists