lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [TOMOYO #16 01/25] LSM: Add security_path_chmod() and security_path_chown().
    Quoting Tetsuo Handa (penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp):
    > This patch allows pathname based LSM modules to check chmod()/chown()
    > operations. Since notify_change() does not receive "struct vfsmount *",
    > we add security_path_chmod() and security_path_chown() to the caller of
    > notify_change().
    >
    > These hooks are used by TOMOYO.
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
    > ---
    > fs/open.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
    > include/linux/security.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    > security/capability.c | 13 +++++++++++++
    > security/security.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
    > 4 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
    >
    > --- security-testing-2.6.orig/fs/open.c
    > +++ security-testing-2.6/fs/open.c
    > @@ -616,6 +616,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(fchmod, unsigned int, fd
    > err = mnt_want_write_file(file);
    > if (err)
    > goto out_putf;
    > + err = security_path_chmod(dentry, file->f_vfsmnt, mode);
    > + if (err)
    > + goto out_drop_write;
    > mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);

    Isn't doing the security check before the mutex_lock racy?

    Any reason not to move it into the lock? (since you had
    considered putting a path hook in notify_change() I assume
    not?)

    -serge


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-10-29 06:15    [W:0.023 / U:89.824 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site