From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Moore Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Security: Provide copy-up security hooks for unioned files Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:28:02 -0500 Message-ID: <1598563.E145j9ZHLH@sifl> References: <2455443.WUExuKDC0I@sifl> <20141105154228.2555.55814.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <3206.1415398234@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from mail-qg0-f52.google.com ([209.85.192.52]:64689 "EHLO mail-qg0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752910AbaKJP2F (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:28:05 -0500 Received: by mail-qg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id a108so5544287qge.39 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 07:28:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3206.1415398234@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-unionfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org To: David Howells Cc: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, November 07, 2014 10:10:34 PM David Howells wrote: > Paul Moore wrote: > > This didn't occur to me earlier, but we may want to pick a different > > phrase to use instead of "copy_up" as that has a special meaning for some > > security/MLS folks... > > It does? Yep, think upgrading the sensitivity level, e.g. relabeling a "secret" file up to a "top secret". > security_inode_make_union()? Actually, after thinking on this some more, forget I mentioned anything. The existing "copy_up" makes the most sense for the LSM hook (it matches the naming of the caller in overlayfs, which is a nice thing) and the number of times any MLS will look that closely at the kernel code is going to be very few. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com