From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Seth Forshee <sforshee@kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>,
selinux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/29] selinux: implement set acl hook
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:47:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220923064707.GD16489@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhS7gEbngqYPMya52EMS5iZYQ_7pPgQiEfRqwPCgzhDbwA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 01:16:57PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> properly review the changes, but one thing immediately jumped out at
> me when looking at this: why is the LSM hook
> "security_inode_set_acl()" when we are passing a dentry instead of an
> inode? We don't have a lot of them, but there are
> `security_dentry_*()` LSM hooks in the existing kernel code.
I'm no LSM expert, but isn't the inode vs dentry for if it is
related to an inode operation or dentry operation, not about that
the first argument is?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-23 6:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-22 15:16 [RFC PATCH 00/29] acl: add vfs posix acl api Christian Brauner
2022-09-22 15:17 ` [PATCH 10/29] selinux: implement set acl hook Christian Brauner
2022-09-22 17:16 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-23 6:47 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2022-09-23 7:57 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-23 14:26 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-23 14:35 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-23 17:35 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-26 9:05 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 18:48 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-27 7:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-22 15:17 ` [PATCH 12/29] evm: " Christian Brauner
2022-09-22 15:17 ` [PATCH 14/29] evm: add post " Christian Brauner
2022-09-22 15:17 ` [PATCH 17/29] evm: simplify evm_xattr_acl_change() Christian Brauner
2022-09-22 16:27 ` [RFC PATCH 00/29] acl: add vfs posix acl api Casey Schaufler
2022-09-22 17:12 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-22 17:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-09-22 18:53 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-22 19:07 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-22 21:57 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2022-09-22 22:13 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-23 5:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-23 8:52 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-23 15:22 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-23 8:45 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-23 14:42 ` Paul Moore
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=20220923064707.GD16489@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=eparis@parisplace.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sforshee@kernel.org \
--cc=stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).