Re: Patch: Socket hooks

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Fri Jul 20 2001 - 13:22:38 PDT

  • Next message: richard offer: "State of Audit Proposal ?"

    On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 04:09:31PM -0400, Chris Vance wrote:
    > 
    > Something escaped my first pass.  Note that two of these hooks have
    > parameters that are user-space variables - accept and setsockopt.  In the
    > first case, accept, they should be removed. In the second case,
    > setsockopt, it's not clear whether an LSM module would care precisely what
    > value is being set.  It would need to be copied into kernel memory and the
    > possibly of a race condition exists. 
    > 
    > Perhaps removing these paramters would be the safest thing to do.
    
    I agree.  Keeping lsm modules from having to handle userspace variables
    is a good thing.  Where ever possible I think we should try to avoid it.
    
    Other than that, the patch looks nice.  However I don't profess to know
    anything about the network stack code :)
    
    Anyone else want to comment if these hooks will work out for their
    projects?
    
    thanks,
    
    greg k-h
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Fri Jul 20 2001 - 13:23:26 PDT