Re: My patch

From: Christopher D. Lundberg (clundberat_private)
Date: Mon Jun 18 2001 - 10:43:41 PDT

  • Next message: Stephen Smalley: "Re: New LSM patch for consideration"

    On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 10:31:15AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
    > On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 09:46:56AM -0700, Titus D. Winters wrote:
    > > Here is a patch against the current posted patch that contains the minimum
    > > changes needed for the project Chris and I are working on.  The changes
    > > are generally filesystem related to check the hooks before finding out the
    > > feasability of performing a filesystem operation, and return error values
    > > as specified from the hook.
    > 
    > Why do you need to do the security checks before the "normal" system
    > checks?  Are you trying to do a type of auditing that catches calls to
    > these functions no matter if the operation is invalid or not?
    > 
    
    Yup, pretty much.  Our project needs to be able to return specific values (mostly not found/doesn't exist values) when users try certain things.  Sometimes the system logic is correct in denying, but incorrect for our purposes in error messages.  
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Mon Jun 18 2001 - 10:44:46 PDT