xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] fs/vfs/security: pass last path component to LSM on inode cr

To: Eric Paris <eparis@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/vfs/security: pass last path component to LSM on inode creation
From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 17:17:22 +0100
Cc: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jfs-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, linux-security-module@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jack@xxxxxxx, penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jeffm@xxxxxxxx, jmorris@xxxxxxxxx, dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx, adilger.kernel@xxxxxxxxx, shaggy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxx, hughd@xxxxxxxxxx, joel.becker@xxxxxxxxxx, chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx, aelder@xxxxxxx, kees.cook@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, paul.moore@xxxxxx, mfasheh@xxxxxxxx, dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx, eparis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, swhiteho@xxxxxxxxxx, tao.ma@xxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, serue@xxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20101208194527.13537.77202.stgit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20101208194527.13537.77202.stgit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:45:27PM -0500, Eric Paris wrote:
> SELinux would like to implement a new labeling behavior of newly created
> inodes.  We currently label new inodes based on the parent and the creating
> process.  This new behavior would also take into account the name of the
> new object when deciding the new label.  This is not the (supposed) full path,
> just the last component of the path.
> 
> This is very useful because creating /etc/shadow is different than creating
> /etc/passwd but the kernel hooks are unable to differentiate these
> operations.  We currently require that userspace realize it is doing some
> difficult operation like that and than userspace jumps through SELinux hoops
> to get things set up correctly.  This patch does not implement new
> behavior, that is obviously contained in a seperate SELinux patch, but it
> does pass the needed name down to the correct LSM hook.  If no such name
> exists it is fine to pass NULL.

-ETOOFUCKINGUGLY...

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