Re: [RFC] [Stacking v4 2/3] New version of SELinux patch to support stacking

From: Stephen Smalley (sds@private)
Date: Wed Dec 08 2004 - 13:35:27 PST

On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 15:24, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Stephen Smalley (sds@private) wrote:
> > Perhaps cap_vm_enough_memory() should be using cap_capable() rather than
> > capable() for checking CAP_SYS_ADMIN?  Otherwise, it is going to set the
> > PF_SUPERPRIV flag in current->flags for the process just because of a
> > mapping, not necessarily just for real use of the capability.
> Yeah, I wondered the same when I did that helper hack.  It's even more
> egregious, because the capability may not even be checked (i.e.

Yes, so I think I'd favor changing cap_vm_enough_memory() to just use
cap_capable() for its checks, and then just have
selinux_vm_enough_memory() just call secondary_ops and not worry about
applying a SELinux check here until we have real support for resource
allocation based on policy.

Stephen Smalley <sds@private>
National Security Agency

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed Dec 08 2004 - 13:41:06 PST