Re: [PATCH 6/8] ima: remove unnecessary code

[Mimi Zohar]

On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 10:19 +0300, Dmitry Kasatkin wrote: 
> If ima_appraise is 0, then action would not mandate to perform
> appraisal and ima_appraise_measurement will never be called.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Kasatkin <d.kasatkin@xxxxxxxxxxx>

The policy determines whether or not a file should be appraised.
Whether IMA is configured and enabled to appraise files is a different
issue.  The test is not done in process_measurement(), but deferred to
here.

Mimi

> ---
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> index 225fd94..013ec3f 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> @@ -192,8 +192,6 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(int func, struct integrity_iint_cache *iint,
>  	enum integrity_status status = INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
>  	int rc = xattr_len, hash_start = 0;
> 
> -	if (!ima_appraise)
> -		return 0;
>  	if (!inode->i_op->getxattr)
>  		return INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> 


--
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/