Re: Common header for security blobs

From: Stephen Smalley (sdsat_private)
Date: Thu Sep 06 2001 - 10:38:03 PDT

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "Re: quotactl hook"

    On 6 Sep 2001, David Wagner wrote:
    
    > I guess the're also another way to support stacking: use a multiplexing
    > module that does all the bookkeeping and dispatching of events to the
    > real policy modules.  This would obviate the need for headers in the
    > security blob, at the cost of introducing another module.  Right?
    
    I'm not sure how to support this cleanly without a common security blob
    header.  The hook functions are passed pointers to the kernel objects, and
    are expected to set and access the security field by dereferencing the
    kernel object.  So the multiplexing module would have to save the security
    field used for its information, set the security field appropriately for
    each module and invoke that module's hook, and then restore the security
    field to point to the multiplexing information.  Similarly, for
    allocation, the multiplexing module would have to call each module's
    alloc_security hook, save the security field after the call, clear it,
    call the next module, ... and then finally set the security field to refer
    to the multiplexing information.  
    
    --
    Stephen D. Smalley, NAI Labs
    ssmalleyat_private
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Thu Sep 06 2001 - 10:39:28 PDT