From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755429AbYIQXFb (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:05:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753380AbYIQXFT (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:05:19 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:34369 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752285AbYIQXFR (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:05:17 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Andrew Morton Cc: Paul Moore , sds@tycho.nsa.gov, jmorris@namei.org, rjw@sisk.pl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org References: <200809171724.36269.paul.moore@hp.com> <20080917144842.7df59f9e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <200809171812.59693.paul.moore@hp.com> <20080917152407.76230f0c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:53:42 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20080917152407.76230f0c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (Andrew Morton's message of "Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:24:07 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=mx04.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=24.130.11.59;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 24.130.11.59 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: too long (recipient list exceeded maximum allowed size of 128 bytes) X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Andrew Morton X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral Subject: Re: [Bug #11500] /proc/net bug related to selinux X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 07 Dec 2006 04:40:56 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mx04.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton writes: > On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:12:59 -0400 > Paul Moore wrote: > >> > We don't even know the extent of the damage yet. Which distros were >> > affected? With which versions of which userspace packages? >> >> Can I assume that the "right" thing to do would be to find the problem >> and revert whatever change caused the issue, yes? Or are we happy to >> wait and see since the fallout so far has been minimal? > > I don't think a revert is justified after all this time. afaik I'm the > first person to notice the problem, and it's been out there for > multiple months. > > However it would be good if we could find some not-completely-stinky > way of making the old userspace work. > > otoh, people who are shipping 2.6.25- and 2.6.26-based distros probably > wouldn't want such a patch in their kernels anyway. Disable selinux? Get a selinux mystic to update that selinux policy. I bet it is a one line change to each the policy about /proc/net as a symlink. Although I am puzzled why we don't get the same label as /proc/net as a directory had. Eric