[Devel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] c/r: Add AF_UNIX support (v5)

[Dan Smith]

SH> That also caused you to skip a bunch of security_* calls (at the
SH> least here, at the recv equivalent, do_sock_getname, and at your
SH> bind at restore).

SH> I don't think simply inserting them here is the right thing to do,
SH> bc then as the main code changes this code is likely to fall out
SH> of sync.  So like Oren says, I think you need to do more re-use of
SH> the common code.  For the bind() case, for instance, write a
SH> common helper used by both sys_bind() and your restart bind, which
SH> does the security check and then calls sock->ops->bind().  It
SH> makes your patchset a bit more intrusive, but easier to maintain.

Does it make sense to modify kern_bind() (and friends) to make the
security_*() calls and then make sys_bind() and my restore code use
kern_bind()?  I don't know enough about the security stuff to know if
the other uses of kern_bind() in the kernel would trip up if the
checks are done there...

-- 
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
email: danms at us.ibm.com
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers