From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
jforbes@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] ima: refactor ima_init_policy()
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 20:51:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1538095898.3459.140.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180926122210.14642-4-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Hi Nayna,
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 17:52 +0530, Nayna Jain wrote:
> +static void add_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *entries, int count,
> + enum policy_rule_list file)
Using "file" to refer to the policy_rule_list enumeration is unusual.
Please change the variable name to something more appropriate.
Mimi
> +{
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> + struct ima_rule_entry *entry;
> +
> + if (file & IMA_DEFAULT_POLICY)
> + list_add_tail(&entries[i].list, &ima_default_rules);
> +
> + if (file & IMA_CUSTOM_POLICY) {
> + entry = kmemdup(&entries[i], sizeof(*entry),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!entry)
> + continue;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&entry->list);
> + list_add_tail(&entry->list, &ima_policy_rules);
> + }
> + if (entries[i].action == APPRAISE)
> + temp_ima_appraise |= ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func);
> + if (entries[i].func == POLICY_CHECK)
> + temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY;
> + }
> +}
> +
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
jforbes@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] ima: refactor ima_init_policy()
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 20:51:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1538095898.3459.140.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180926122210.14642-4-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Hi Nayna,
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 17:52 +0530, Nayna Jain wrote:
> +static void add_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *entries, int count,
> + enum policy_rule_list file)
Using "file" to refer to the policy_rule_list enumeration is unusual.
Please change the variable name to something more appropriate.
Mimi
> +{
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> + struct ima_rule_entry *entry;
> +
> + if (file & IMA_DEFAULT_POLICY)
> + list_add_tail(&entries[i].list, &ima_default_rules);
> +
> + if (file & IMA_CUSTOM_POLICY) {
> + entry = kmemdup(&entries[i], sizeof(*entry),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!entry)
> + continue;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&entry->list);
> + list_add_tail(&entry->list, &ima_policy_rules);
> + }
> + if (entries[i].action == APPRAISE)
> + temp_ima_appraise |= ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func);
> + if (entries[i].func == POLICY_CHECK)
> + temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY;
> + }
> +}
> +
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: zohar@linux.ibm.com (Mimi Zohar)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 3/6] ima: refactor ima_init_policy()
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 20:51:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1538095898.3459.140.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180926122210.14642-4-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Hi Nayna,
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 17:52 +0530, Nayna Jain wrote:
> +static void add_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *entries, int count,
> + enum policy_rule_list file)
Using "file" to refer to the policy_rule_list enumeration is unusual.
?Please change the variable name to something more appropriate.
Mimi
> +{
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> + struct ima_rule_entry *entry;
> +
> + if (file & IMA_DEFAULT_POLICY)
> + list_add_tail(&entries[i].list, &ima_default_rules);
> +
> + if (file & IMA_CUSTOM_POLICY) {
> + entry = kmemdup(&entries[i], sizeof(*entry),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!entry)
> + continue;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&entry->list);
> + list_add_tail(&entry->list, &ima_policy_rules);
> + }
> + if (entries[i].action == APPRAISE)
> + temp_ima_appraise |= ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func);
> + if (entries[i].func == POLICY_CHECK)
> + temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY;
> + }
> +}
> +
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-28 0:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-26 12:22 [PATCH v4 0/6] Add support for architecture specific IMA policies Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] x86/ima: define arch_ima_get_secureboot Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-27 11:33 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 11:33 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 11:33 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-26 12:22 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] ima: prevent kexec_load syscall based on runtime secureboot flag Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-27 11:33 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 11:33 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 11:33 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-26 12:22 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] ima: refactor ima_init_policy() Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-27 12:16 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 12:16 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 12:16 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-28 0:51 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2018-09-28 0:51 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-28 0:51 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-26 12:22 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] ima: add support for arch specific policies Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-27 13:27 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 13:27 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 13:27 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-26 12:22 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] ima: add support for external setting of ima_appraise Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-27 13:20 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 13:20 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 13:20 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-10-05 17:44 ` Nayna Jain
2018-10-05 17:44 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/ima: define arch_get_ima_policy() for x86 Nayna Jain
2018-09-26 12:22 ` Nayna Jain
2018-09-27 13:31 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 13:31 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-09-27 13:31 ` Mimi Zohar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1538095898.3459.140.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jforbes@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.