Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook

On Friday 25 May 2007 19:43, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> [...] but the AppArmor code could certainly check for that in exec by
> enforcing the argv[0] convention. It would be perfectly reasonable for a
> system that is so dependent on pathnames to require that.

Hmm ... that's a strange idea. AppArmor cannot assume anything about argv[0], 
and it would be a really bad idea to change the well-established semantics of 
argv[0].

There is no actual need for looking at argv[0], though: AppArmor decides based 
on the actual pathname of the executable...

Thanks,
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook
    • From: Casey Schaufler <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook
    • From: Casey Schaufler <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH - 1/1] Documentation/HOWTO
• Next by Date: RE: [PATCH 1/2] msi: Invert the sense of the MSI enables.
• Previous by thread: Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook
• Next by thread: Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]