From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
keyrings@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Subject: Re: [Keyrings] [PATCH] Keys: Add LSM hooks for key management
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 10:10:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <21866.1128676205@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051006175817.GK16352@shell0.pdx.osdl.net>
Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org> wrote:
> The security check is comparing key label to task label. If it's not
> done 100% in current context, then task must be passed to get access
> to proper label. So, for example, request-key is done by the special
> privileged /sbin/request-key via usermodehelper on behalf of someone else.
Which task(s)? Both the one doing the check, and the one on whose behalf the
check is done?
> > Auditing?
>
> Hmm, suppose, but auditing is not the charter of LSM. So in this case,
> the previous hook can audit key creation if needed. Just looking to
> avoid hook proliferation if possible.
But you don't know the key serial number at that point, hence why I added the
second hook. I'll drop the second. I can always bring it back later.
> > That's what I was thinking of.
>
> I see, what would they used for?
I don't know. As far as I know, setxattr and co can be used to set and
retrieve security data on files. I thought it would be desirable to have
similar for keys. If not, I can remove both calls/hooks for the time being.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-07 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-05 16:28 [PATCH] Keys: Add LSM hooks for key management David Howells
2005-10-05 16:44 ` [Keyrings] " James Morris
2005-10-05 16:48 ` David Howells
2005-10-05 19:31 ` James Morris
2005-10-05 18:40 ` serue
2005-10-05 21:10 ` [Keyrings] " Chris Wright
2005-10-06 8:03 ` James Morris
2005-10-06 10:54 ` David Howells
2005-10-06 15:04 ` James Morris
2005-10-06 15:18 ` David Howells
2005-10-06 16:02 ` James Morris
2005-10-07 8:50 ` David Howells
2005-10-07 18:36 ` Chris Wright
2005-10-06 17:58 ` Chris Wright
2005-10-07 9:10 ` David Howells [this message]
2005-10-07 12:59 ` Stephen Smalley
2005-10-07 18:51 ` Chris Wright
2005-10-06 10:30 ` David Howells
2005-10-06 23:10 ` Chris Wright
2005-10-07 9:57 ` David Howells
2005-10-07 19:36 ` Chris Wright
2005-10-06 8:38 ` James Morris
2005-10-06 11:06 ` David Howells
2005-10-06 14:25 ` James Morris
2005-10-06 15:11 ` David Howells
2005-10-06 16:14 ` James Morris
2005-10-07 9:03 ` David Howells
2005-10-07 14:05 ` 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=21866.1128676205@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=chrisw@osdl.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keyrings@linux-nfs.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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