Re: [RFC] LSM fix for stupid "empty" functions

From: Olaf Dietsche (olaf.dietsche#list.linux-kernel@t-online.de)
Date: Sun Dec 01 2002 - 10:46:02 PST

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: [RFC] LSM fix for stupid "empty" functions"

    James Morris <jmorrisat_private> writes:
    
    > On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Greg KH wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 05:59:10PM +0100, Olaf Dietsche wrote:
    >> > >  	VERIFY_STRUCT(struct security_operations, ops, err);
    >> > 
    >> > This shouldn't be necessary anymore.
    >> 
    >> Good point, I'll remove it.  It was a hack anyway :)
    >> 
    >
    > I think we still want to make sure that the module author has explicitly
    > accounted for all of the hooks, in case new hooks are added.
    
    VERIFY_STRUCT() now verifies, wether security_fixup_ops() has done its
    job. So it does no harm, but it is useless, nevertheless.
    
    If you want to check, wether a module has been recompiled, you should
    add a length/sizeof(struct security_operations) parameter.
    
    Regards, Olaf.
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Sun Dec 01 2002 - 10:47:25 PST