netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Add audit uid to netlink credentials

To: Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add audit uid to netlink credentials
From: Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 07:51:23 -0500
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Linux Audit Discussion <linux-audit@xxxxxxxxxx>, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1108038968.22172.26.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>
Organization: National Security Agency
References: <20050204165840.GA2320@IBM-BWN8ZTBWA01.austin.ibm.com> <1107958621.19262.524.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> <1107960659.4837.9.camel@serge> <1107973381.17568.97.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20050209103747.Y24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> <1107974448.17568.108.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20050209153816.B24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20050209171115.G24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> <1108038968.22172.26.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 07:36, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> Why not just call the security handler from the security_netlink_send()
> function, which is already called by netlink_sendmsg()?

Ok, I can see why you wouldn't want to do that, but why not just call
the handler immediately after security_netlink_send() then in
netlink_sendmsg()?  What is the advantage of deferring to
netlink_sendskb (and some other location for broadcasts)?

-- 
Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
National Security Agency


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