[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] fix missing security_*() check in net/compat.c

To: James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix missing security_*() check in net/compat.c
From: Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:06:34 -0800
Cc: Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>, Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <Xine.LNX.4.44.0411301117010.12330-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx on Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 11:17:41AM -0500
References: <20041130145444.GF63669@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Xine.LNX.4.44.0411301117010.12330-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
* James Morris (jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Mitchell Blank Jr wrote:
> > While looking at the SCM passing code in net/core/scm.c I noticed that 
> > there's
> > a 32-bit compat implementation of scm_detach_fds()'s called 
> > scm_detach_fds_compat() living in net/compat.c.  While these two functions
> > are mostly the same the latter does not include the call to the
> > security_file_receive() hook which is almost certainly a bug.
> > 
> > My sparc64 test box isn't set up currently so this is not tested.  Someone
> > running a 64-bit kernel with CONFIG_COMPAT should verify that this at
> > least compiles.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Looks correct to me.
> Signed-off-by: James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>

Yup, looks fine.

Linux Security Modules

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>