From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [patch 01/15] security: pass path to inode_create Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 05:23:51 -0600 Message-ID: <20080602112350.GB8562@parisc-linux.org> References: <20080529134903.615127628@szeredi.hu> <20080529134958.655985182@szeredi.hu> <20080531083052.GH24135@infradead.org> <20080602060144.GA11564@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: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:52329 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751647AbYFBLYI (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2008 07:24:08 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 09:02:14AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > I maintain, that moving lsm hooks into callers is insane. And that's > *the* sanest alternative that anybody has been able to come up with to > passing down vfsmounts into the vfs. Not so. I showed how pathname-based security could be done *without* passing vfsmounts down at all. Unfortunately, you weren't interested. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."