Re: [RESEND][PATCH v3] security: Place security_path_post_mknod() where the original IMA call was

[Paul Moore]

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 9:11 AM Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 11:07 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> >
> > However, as reported by VFS maintainers, successful mknod operation does
> > not mean that the dentry always has an inode attached to it (for example,
> > not for FIFOs on a SAMBA mount).
> >
> > If that condition happens, the kernel crashes when
> > security_path_post_mknod() attempts to verify if the inode associated to
> > the dentry is private.
>
> This is an example of why making the LSM hook more generic than needed didn't
> work.  Based on the discussion there is no valid reason for making the hook more
> generic.

I agree, I think we all do, but I don't think we want to get into
process discussions in the patch description.  The description
explains the original motivation for the buggy commit, the problem it
caused, and the solution; that's enough IMHO.

-- 
paul-moore.com