lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] selinux: Fix selinux_sb_mnt_opts_compat()
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 7:46 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 3:28 AM Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:54 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > I wonder if we could make this all much simpler by *always* doing the
> > > label parsing in selinux_add_opt() and just returning an error when
> > > !selinux_initialized(&selinux_state). Before the new mount API, mount
> > > options were always passed directly to the mount(2) syscall, so it
> > > wasn't possible to pass any SELinux mount options before the SELinux
> > > policy was loaded. I don't see why we need to jump through hoops here
> > > just to support this pseudo-feature of stashing an unparsed label into
> > > an fs_context before policy is loaded... Userspace should never need
> > > to do that.
> >
> > I could agree with that, although part of my mind is a little nervous
> > about the "userspace should *never* ..." because that always seems to
> > bite us. Although I'm struggling to think of a case where userspace
> > would need to set explicit SELinux mount options without having a
> > policy loaded.
>
> I get that, but IMO this is enough of an odd "use case" that I
> wouldn't worry too much ...

I understand, but seeing as I'm the only one that defends these things
with Linus and others lets do this:

1. Fix what we have now using Scott's patches once he incorporates the feedback.
2. Merge another patch (separate patch(set) please!) which does the
parsing in selinux_add_opt().

... this was if we have to revert #2 we still have the fixes in #1.

--
paul-moore.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-01-31 17:16    [W:0.072 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site