Re: value of task p_pptr in task_alloc_security

Previous message: Seth Arnold: "Re: value of task p_pptr in task_alloc_security"
In reply to: Seth Arnold: "Re: value of task p_pptr in task_alloc_security"
Next in thread: Seth Arnold: "Re: value of task p_pptr in task_alloc_security"
Reply: Seth Arnold: "Re: value of task p_pptr in task_alloc_security"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

tpotat_private

On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 05:04:09PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:

> > My problem is that the p_pptr in the task struct passed points
> > to the grandfather process not the father.  Is this a problem with
> > old versions of LSM?  I'm using the 2.4.18 patch which I realise
> > is quite old.
> 
> Tim, in the version of LSM I've got easiest access to, this looks like
> the expected behavior -- the parent task pointer is set well after
> the LSM hook has been called. You can still find the parent task by
> dereferencing current, so it should not be an insurmountable problem.

I looked through fork.c and it looked like this was the case but I
wasn't very sure.  Unfortunately it looks like in this case the parent 
of current is also pointing to the grandfather.  )-:

I might have to work around it another way.

Tim.