Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:25:11 -0400 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/4] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM) |
| |
On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 09:52:13AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > We started out with the integrity_inode_permission() hook call in > inode_permission(), but because of the removal of the nameidata > parameter in the last merge, based on discussions > http://marc.info/?l=linux-security-module&m=121797845308246&w=2, > the call to integrity_inode_permission() was moved up to the caller, > where either a file or path are available. Any suggestions?
vfs_permission and file_permission are just small wrappers around inode_permission. In hindsight they actualyl were a wrong idea and will probably go away in the not so distant future. Note that there are various callers of inode_permission that don't have a vfsmount anywhere near.
| |