From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov,
paul.moore@hp.com, jmorris@namei.org, sds@tycho.nsa.gov,
pablo@netfilter.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] secmark: export secctx, drop secmark in procfs
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:31:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CB873D2.4030309@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1010151725020.30823@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Am 15.10.2010 17:25, schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
> On Friday 2010-10-15 17:22, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
>> Am 13.10.2010 22:25, schrieb Eric Paris:
>>> The current secmark code exports a secmark= field which just indicates if
>>> there is special labeling on a packet or not. We drop this field as it
>>> isn't particularly useful and instead export a new field secctx= which is
>>> the actual human readable text label.
>>
>> We usually don't do this to avoid breaking parsers, however in
>> this case the field was dependant on a config option anyways,
>> so userspace must already be prepared that it is missing.
>
> But do we really /have/ to add more and more stuff to procfs?
As long as we don't add new files, I don't really mind.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-15 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-13 20:24 [PATCH 1/4] secmark: make secmark object handling generic Eric Paris
2010-10-13 20:24 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-13 20:24 ` [PATCH 2/4] security: secid_to_secctx returns len when data is NULL Eric Paris
2010-10-13 20:24 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-13 20:24 ` [PATCH 3/4] conntrack: export lsm context rather than internal secid via netlink Eric Paris
2010-10-13 20:24 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-15 15:20 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-10-13 20:25 ` [PATCH 4/4] secmark: export secctx, drop secmark in procfs Eric Paris
2010-10-13 20:25 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-15 15:22 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-10-15 15:25 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-10-15 15:31 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2010-10-15 15:18 ` [PATCH 1/4] secmark: make secmark object handling generic Patrick McHardy
2010-10-17 23:15 ` James Morris
2010-10-17 23:15 ` James Morris
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=4CB873D2.4030309@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=paul.moore@hp.com \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
/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.