Re: [Patch 1/2] selinux: ajust rules for ATTR_FORCE

[OGAWA Hirofumi]

Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> E.g. mode change has implicit ATTR_CTIME change. So it meant, we should
>> check the both of FILE__SETATTR and FILE__WRITE?
>
> No, just setattr.

Ok.

>> > ATTR_FORCE is supposed to suppress permission checking altogether, and
>> > shouldn't be mixed with multiple attribute changes if some should be
>> > subject to permission checks while others should not.
>> 
>> I disagree. In fact, ATTR_FORCE is just used for ATTR_KILL_S[UG]ID, and
>> notify_change() is disallowing the mixed ATTR_MODE and ATTR_KILL_*. I
>> think it should be enough.
>
> Ok, then we just need to adjust selinux_inode_setattr to understand that
> ATTR_FORCE only means to bypass checking on ATTR_MODE.

Ok, sure. I'll try it.

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
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/