Re: [patch 0/15] lsm stacking v0.3: intro

From: serge
Date: Sat Jul 30 2005 - 22:46:12 EST

Quoting Steve Beattie (sbeattie@xxxxxxx):
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 01:18:52PM -0700, Tony Jones wrote:
> > # cat /proc/2322/attr/current
> > unconstrained (subdomain)
> > foobar (foobar)
> >
> > # ps -Z -p 2322
> > unconstrained 2322 ttyS0 00:00:00 bash
> Actually, no, it is the space preceding the open paren that is invalid;
> see this patch for the expanded allowed character set in procps 3.2.5:
> When I discussed this with Albert Cahalan, he *strongly* objected to
> allowing whitespace in security contexts, as he felt it would break
> scripts that parsed 'ps -Z' output.

Right, I thought this was actually a feature :) This is how ps
continues to show expected output under stacker. Given naturally limited
space, showing output for multiple modules may not be a good idea. If
you want more detail, you go to /proc/pid/attr/current...

Clearly this is limiting, but then so is the one line per process you
get with ps - "fixing" that is obviously not acceptable. Is there
another suggestion for how to handle this, in such a way that ps would
show info for >1 module? Is there any example where the current
behavior is actually a problem - two modules which it makes sense to
stack, which both need to give output under ps?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at