Re: Some feedback on the hooks

From: Serge E. Hallyn (hallynat_private)
Date: Wed Apr 25 2001 - 20:21:35 PDT

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: 2001_04_25 patch against 2.4.3"

    Quoting Chris Wright (chrisat_private):
    > * Stephen Smalley (sdsat_private) wrote:
    > > fs/namei.c:  I would have suggested a hook after each successful 
    > > call to i_op->lookup to allow the security module to 
    > > set the security field of the inode when it is first looked up
    > > (since useful information like its inode number and mode should
    > > then be available, which isn't available in get_new_inode
    > > after the read_inode call for many file system types).  But I'm not sure
    > > how to sync that with Serge's attach_pathlabel hooks - it seems like we
    > > may be trying to provide the same functionality but
    > > on different levels (inode-based vs. pathname-based).
    > > It also seems like Serge's attach_pathlabel hooks
    > > overlap somewhat with the idea of post-create hooks,
    > > but again dealing at different levels - the vfsmount isn't
    > > available in the vfs_create/mkdir/etc routines.
    
    Exactly.  Of course, if the location of the attach_pathlabel calls
    following vfs_create and its kin were acceptable to all for a
    post-create hook, then the attach_pathlabel could be replaced,
    and I'd just attach the same code to the post_create stub as to
    attach_pathlabel.
    
    Unfortunately, I'm not sure there's a clean way to reconcile the
    calls after i_op->lookup.
    
    > yeah Serge's pathlable hooks are often near the post-create hooks.  it would
    > be nice to collapse these if possible.
    
    -serge
    
    _______________________________________________
    linux-security-module mailing list
    linux-security-moduleat_private
    http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Apr 25 2001 - 20:23:01 PDT