On Tuesday 06 February 2007 01:52, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 06:13:26PM -0800, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > On Monday 05 February 2007 10:44, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Looking at the actual patches I see you're lazy in a lot of places.
> > > Please make sure that when you introduce a vfsmount argument somewhere
> > > that it is _always_ passed and not just when it's conveniant. Yes,
> > > that's more work, but then again if you're not consistant anyone
> > > half-serious will laught at a security model using this infrasturcture.
> >
> > It may appear like laziness, but it's not. Let's look at where we're
> > passing NULL at the moment:
>
> You know, I've tracked a lot of this down previously when I submitted
> patches to add vfsmount arguments to the vfs_ helpers, just to get tought
> by Al that this is a bad idea :)
Hmmm, I really would like to know how else we could get at that information in
the lsm hooks then.
Andreas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
