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

[Mimi Zohar]

On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 23:12 +0900, hooanon05@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Mimi Zohar:
> > This patch fixes an imbalance message as reported by J.R. Okajima.
> > The IMA file counters are incremented in ima_path_check. If the
> > actual open fails, such as ETXTBSY, decrement the counters to
> > prevent unnecessary imbalance messages.
> 
> Although I have no objection for this fix, I'd like to suggest you to
> stop incrementing the counters in ima_path_check().
> A while ago IMA_COUNT_LEAVE and ima_counts_get() were introduced, and
> now ima_counts_put() appears.
> Isn't it easier something like this,
> - stop incrementing in ima_path_check().
> - call ima_counts_get() in dentry_open() (or similar).
> - delete IMA_COUNT_LEAVE/UPDATE and ima_counts_put().
> 
> How do you think?
> 
> 
> J. R. Okajima

This suggestion has been mentioned before; and yes would definitely
resolve the annoying imbalance and iint_free() messages.  But
incrementing/decrementing the pointers automatically each time a file is
opened/closed would defeat their purpose - alerting us that a file was
possibly not measured before being read/executed. 

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/