Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
	Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
	Kingdom.
	Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <545B73DE.6090101@tycho.nsa.gov>
References: <545B73DE.6090101@tycho.nsa.gov> <545A51CB.6070107@tycho.nsa.gov> <20141105154217.2555.578.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20141105154307.2555.9847.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <11463.1415275413@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] SELinux: Handle opening of a unioned file
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <12038.1417097723.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 14:15:23 +0000
Message-ID: <12039.1417097723@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov> wrote:

> > The third case is the tricky one because we have to try and derive a
> > label.  I've copied the code from the inode creation - so unless the
> > policy changes or the parent directory inode changes, I would've thought
> > we'd be okay.
> 
> Only if the filesystem ultimately calls security_inode_init_security()
> on the new inode.

I'm not sure what you mean?  What new inode?

The isec label derived by the code goes in the file struct, not the inode
struct because we can only get here if there isn't an inode struct.

David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/