Messages in this thread | | | From | Russell Coker <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] remove sys_security | Date | Thu, 17 Oct 2002 23:37:49 +0200 |
| |
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 23:10, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>Any idea if security identifiers change with each syscall? > >> > >>If not, a lot of the xxx_secure syscalls could go away... > > > > None of them can go away. > > > > Security identifiers are for the operation you perform. For example > > open_secure() is so that you can specify the security context for a new > > file that you are creating. connect_secure() is used to specify the > > security context of the socket you want to connect to. In the default > > setup the only way that connect_secure() and open_secure() can use the > > same SID is for unix domain sockets (which are labeled with file types). > > A TCP connection will be to a process, the SID of a process is not a > > valid type label for a file. > > > > lstat_secure(), recv_secure() and others are used to retrieve the > > security context of the file, network message, etc. > > What specific information differs per-operation, such that security > identifiers cannot be stored internally inside a file handle?
My previous message obviously wasn't clear enough.
When you want to read or set the SID of a file handle then you need to pass in a SID pointer or a SID.
This is what the *_secure() system calls do, they set a SID or read a SID.
-- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |