[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 2/3] lsm: add bsdjail module
On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 21:22, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Then they would have to check for an optional "selinux: " at the front
> of each security_setprocattr entry read in the kernel, in order to handle
> an lsm infrastructure change which might never be accepted into the kernel
> anyway. I suppose it's pretty trivial anyway, but then why would they
> bother...

The changes to libselinux and procps and any scripts that directly
access /proc/pid/attr to deal with multi-entry values would be more
important; changing the kernel to prepend "selinux: " on getprocattr and
to strip it on setprocattr would indeed be trivial (but one wonders
whether we can be confident that userspace will never try to pass one of
these multi-entry values read from /proc/pid/attr to another interface
that expects a single context, e.g. selinuxfs or

Stephen Smalley <>
National Security Agency

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [W:0.065 / U:26.628 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site