Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-130023-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240403090749.2929667-1-roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com> <6d3b9d8a5f5a2ca010a5a701d7826e47912fec89.camel@linux.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <6d3b9d8a5f5a2ca010a5a701d7826e47912fec89.camel@linux.ibm.com>
From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 11:02:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhQjcvRBo30Y346p5Tbo3pspxnnmrLj6nvv1g=e_52SQUg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH v3] security: Place security_path_post_mknod()
 where the original IMA call was
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, 
	brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com, 
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, pc@manguebit.com, 
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>, 
	Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 9:11=E2=80=AFAM Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com> wro=
te:
> On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 11:07 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> >
> > However, as reported by VFS maintainers, successful mknod operation doe=
s
> > not mean that the dentry always has an inode attached to it (for exampl=
e,
> > 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 t=
o
> > the dentry is private.
>
> This is an example of why making the LSM hook more generic than needed di=
dn't
> work.  Based on the discussion there is no valid reason for making the ho=
ok 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.

--=20
paul-moore.com