Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 22:07:01 -0700 | From | Tony Jones <> | Subject | Re: [patch 0/15] lsm stacking v0.3: intro |
| |
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 01:17:32PM -0500, serue@us.ibm.com wrote:
Hi Serge.
A few trivial things I noticed whilst writing some internal documentation on Stacker. Nothing deep here, but thought I'd pass them along.
I'll try to actually try out the code next week.
I made these notes as I was going along, lmk if you need them annotated to the original patch and I'll go back and redo.
Thanks again
Tony
1) Documentation refers to /security/stacker/list_modules, code refers to "listmodules". list_modules is more consistent with other file names.
2) symbol_get(ops) still at the end of stacker_register.
3) struct module_entry{ struct list_head lsm_list; /* list of active lsms */ struct list_head all_lsms; /* list of active lsms */
fix comments
4) Would it be useful to change the struct elements lsm_list and all_lsms to be consistent with their list heads (stacked_modules and all_modules).
5) /* * Workarounds for the fact that get and setprocattr are used only by * selinux. (Maybe) */
No complaints on selinux getting to avoid the (module), they are intree. Just a FYI that SubDomain/AppArmor uses these hooks also.
6) stop_responding control file is misnamed, as stacker still continues to work it just removes the virtual file system
7) Does the lsm_list really need to be at the top of the struct? Good style but not sure it is required (must).
8) security-stack.h * If stacker is compiled in, then we use the full functions as * defined in security/security.c. Otherwise we use the #defines * here.
I noticed the conditional CONFIG_SECURITY_STACKER code went away, previously it would look at the value chain head only for the !case. But this comment still remains.
> Hi, > > The set of patches to follow introduces support for stacking LSMs. This > is its third posting to lkml. I am sending it out in the hopes of > soliciting more widespread feedback and testing, with the obvious eventual > goal of mainline adoption. > > Any feedback from people actually using this patch is appreciated. Even > better would be posts of (stackable) LSMs for upstream inclusion :) - 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/
| |