Re: [PATCH] procfs: add smack subdir to attrs

[Josà Bollo]

On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 16:59:24 -0700
Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 6/1/2017 4:38 PM, James Morris wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> >  
> >> Subject: [PATCH] procfs: add smack subdir to attrs  
> > Is there value in this without major stacking support?  
> 
> Yes. If a Smack aware application reads /proc/self/attr/current
> it has no way to know if what it sees is a Smack label or an
> SELinux context. True, the application can look elsewhere
> (i.e. /sys/kernel/security/lsm) to find out which is enabled.
> But the real fix is for Smack to use a different interface
> than SELinux. Which is what this does. True, it will be even
> more important when/if major stacking comes in, but it is still
> significant now, and I would like to have it regardless of
> the future acceptance of major stacking.

I agree that it is a nice forward movement to leave the mud.

I have a subsidiary question to ask. Should we keep the name 'attr' for
the subdirectory? It seems at least convenient but if a better name is
valuable (security, lsm, ...) why not to switch now?

BR josÃ

> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-security-module" in the body of a message to
> majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html