Security Enhanced Linux
What's New
Frequently Asked Questions
Background
Documents
License
Download
Participating
Mail List
Archives
Remaining Work
Contributors
Related Work
Press Releases
Information Assurance Research
NIARL In-house Research Areas
Mathematical Sciences Program
Sabbaticals
Computer & Information Sciences Research
Technology Transfer
Advanced Computing
Advanced Mathematics
Communications & Networking
Information Processing
Microelectronics
Other Technologies
Technology Fact Sheets
Publications
Related Links
|
SELinux Mailing ListRe: [PATCH 1/2] VFS: Factor out part of vfs_setxattr so it can be called from the SELinux hook for inode_setsecctx.
From: Casey Schaufler <casey_at_schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 10:14:15 -0800 (PST)
> For some odd reason I can't quite parse the first two parts Let me try a different angle on the question. Maybe it just doesn't come up as a real issue, and I'm concerned about nothing. Just for grins lets say I wanted to set the secctx on a directory in a derivative of ramfs in some unspecified way that is not related to mkdir. There are no on-disk inodes. Should the code call inode_setsecctx, inode_notifysecctx, or both? It seems rational to me to call inode_setsecctx, but since the differentiation between the interfaces is the "on disk" factor and ramfs only exists as in core, it would seem that inode_notifysecctx would be correct. Like I say, maybe it never comes up, but having these two very similar interfaces (or the old flag) begs the question of when to use each for things other than their original purpose. I think we'll live in a better LSM if it's clear.
> of your Ok then, no worries. Thank you
Casey Schaufler
-- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.Received on Fri 7 Mar 2008 - 13:14:34 EST |
|
Date Posted: Jan 15, 2009 | Last Modified: Jan 15, 2009 | Last Reviewed: Jan 15, 2009 |