On Saturday 17 November 2007 11:00:20 pm Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Hello.
Hello.
> Paul Moore wrote:
> > Okay, well if that is the case I think you are going to have another
> > problem in that you could end up throwing away skbs that haven't been
> > through your security_post_recv_datagram() hook because you _always_
> > throw away the result of the second skb_peek(). Once again, if I'm wrong
> > please correct me.
>
> I didn't understand what's wrong with throwing away the result of
> the second skb_peek().
My concern is that you stated earlier that you needed to do the second
skb_peek() because the first skb may have been removed from the socket queue
while your LSM was making an access decision in
security_post_recv_datagram(). If that is the case then the second call to
skb_peek() will return a different skb then the one you passed to
security_post_recv_datagram(). This is significant because you always throw
away this second skb without first consulting the LSM via
security_post_recv_datagram().
--
paul moore
linux security @ hp
-
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]