Re: [PATCH] integrity: add ima_counts_put (updated)

[Mimi Zohar]

On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 13:02 +0900, hooanon05@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Mimi Zohar:
> > NFSv3 is an interesting example. Permission checking is done once,
> > followed by multiple open/read/close calls. Incrementing the counters in
> > nfsd_permission() once and decrementing the counters in close, multiple
> > times, resulted in imbalance messages.  True, the solution in this case
> > was to increment in open and decrement in close, but that was only part
> > of the solution.  The other part of the solution, the important part,
> > was to add a call to ima_path_check() to measure the file.
> 
> Let me make sure.
> Does "that was only part of the solution" mean IMA does not work for
> NFSD fully? To make IMA work fully, is incrementing before open
> absolutely necessary?
> 
> J. R. Okajima

The patch is fine.  It adds a call to ima_path_check() in
nfsd_permission(), but delays incrementing the counters to nfsd_open()
and decrementing the counters to nfsd_close() in order for the counters
to be balanced.

Mimi

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/