Re: [PATCH] kobject support for LSM core

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Sun Mar 09 2003 - 22:47:38 PST

  • Next message: Russell Coker: "Re: Which module is "best"?"

    On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 01:13:10AM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
    > 
    >   the following patch (against 2.5.64) introduces kobject infrastructure
    > scaffolding to the LSM framework. It does nothing but allocating security root
    > subsystem for the LSMs, so that they are tied to one specific point in the
    > kobject hierarchy. They are suggested to create own subsystems under the
    > security subsystem, however such things are completely up to the individual
    > LSMs and not regulated by core in any way (it's not that I would so much like
    > such an approach, but I was advised so by GregKH and it makes sense in its own
    > way as well).
    
    Hm, I thought I advised not doing this at all :)
    
    Anyway, if we were to add this, you might want to:
    
    > +
    > +/* kobject stuff */
    > +
    > +/* We define only the base subsystem here and leave everything to a LSM. It is
    > + * heavily recommended that the LSM should create own subsystem under this one,
    > + * so that it can be easily made stackable and it doesn't confuse userland by
    > + * exporting its stuff directly to /sys/security/. */
    > +decl_subsys(security,NULL);
    
    Add a prototype of this variable to security.h so that everyone can
    actually see it who wants to use it.
    
    > +/**
    > + * security_kobj_init - initializes the security kobject subsystem
    > + *
    > + * This is called after security_scaffolding_startup as a regular initcall,
    > + * since we need sysfs mounted already.
    > + */
    > +static int __init security_kobj_init (void)
    > +{
    > +	subsystem_register (&security_subsys);
    > +	return 0;
    > +}
    > +
    > +subsys_initcall(security_kobj_init);
    
    Why not initialize this when the security core is initialized?  Why
    have a new initcall?
    
    And when do you unregister this subsystem?
    
    > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(security_subsys);
    
    No EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() for it?  :)
    
    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 : Mon Mar 10 2003 - 13:00:56 PST