Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Lutomirski <> | Date | Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:34:00 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 01/10] security: Override creds in __fput() with last fputter's creds [ver #3] |
| |
On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 12:09 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> wrote: > > On 6/6/2019 10:18 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 8:06 AM David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> > Casey, I think you need to state your requirement in a way that's well > > defined, and I think you need to make a compelling case that your > > requirement is indeed worth dictating the design of parts of the > > kernel outside LSM. > > Err, no, I don't believe so. There's a whole lot more > going on in this discussion than just what's going on > within the LSMs. Using examples from the LSMs makes it > easier, because their policies are better defined than > the "legacy" policies are. The most important part of the > discussion is about ensuring that the event mechanism > doesn't circumvent the legacy policies. Yes, I understand > that you don't know what that means, or has to do with > anything. > >
Indeed, I do not know what you have in mind about making sure this mechanism doesn't circumvent legacy policies. Can you elaborate?
--Andy
| |