Re: [TOMOYO #13 (mmotm 2008-11-19-02-19) 01/11] Introducesecurity_path_clear() hook.

From: Stephen Smalley
Date: Mon Dec 01 2008 - 15:03:46 EST

On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 20:25 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> plain text document attachment (introduce-security_path_clear.patch)
> To perform DAC performed in vfs_foo() before MAC, we let security_path_foo()
> save a result into our own hash table and return 0, and let security_inode_foo()
> return the saved result. Since security_inode_foo() is not always called after
> security_path_foo(), we need security_path_clear() to clear the hash table.

This seems very fragile and unmaintainable to me. The fact that you
even need a security_path_clear() hook suggests that something is wrong
with the other security_path* hooks. I'd suggest that you explicitly
pass the result of the security_path* hooks down to the security_inode*
hooks instead. What do others think?

Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency

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