From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [patch 01/15] security: pass path to inode_create Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 06:42:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20080602104203.GA21898@infradead.org> References: <20080529134903.615127628@szeredi.hu> <20080529134958.655985182@szeredi.hu> <20080531083052.GH24135@infradead.org> <20080602060144.GA11564@infradead.org> <20080602091341.GA8011@infradead.org> <20080602093630.GA25254@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: hch@infradead.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, sds@tycho.nsa.gov, eparis@redhat.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, agruen@suse.de, jjohansen@suse.de, penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Miklos Szeredi Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > These patches fix several issues raised at previous submissions: > > - passing NULL vfsmounts > - using nameidata > - using extra stack for vfsmount argument > > So, it seems to me that there's in fact no issues remaining and the > best excuse you can come up with is that it's a dumb idea. Well, > that's not a very imressive technical argument IMNSHO. Well, pathname based access control is a dumb idea, and we've been through this N times. You've also been told that vfs_ routines should remain without vfsmount, and no that's not a stack-related issue no idea where that part came from.