From: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Oren Laadan <orenl@cellrox.com>,
Ruchi Kandoi <kandoiruchi@google.com>,
Rom Lemarchand <romlem@android.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>,
Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>, Nick Kralevich <nnk@google.com>,
Dmitry Shmidt <dimitrysh@google.com>,
Elliott Hughes <enh@google.com>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2 v3] security: Add task_settimerslack/task_gettimerslack LSM hook
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 16:12:51 +1000 (AEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1607201612020.23817@namei.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1468872671-9002-2-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org>
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, John Stultz wrote:
> As requested, this patch implements a task_settimerslack and
> task_gettimerslack LSM hooks so that the /proc/<tid>/timerslack_ns
> interface can have finer grained security policies applied to it.
>
> I've kept the CAP_SYS_NICE check in the timerslack_ns_write/show
> functions, as hiding it in the LSM hook seems too opaque, and doesn't
> seem like a widely enough adopted practice.
>
I may have missed something in the earlier discussion, but why do we need
new LSM hooks here vs. calling the existing set/getscheduler hooks?
--
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-20 6:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-18 20:11 [RFC][PATCH 1/2 v3] proc: Relax /proc/<tid>/timerslack_ns capability requirements John Stultz
2016-07-18 20:11 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2 v3] security: Add task_settimerslack/task_gettimerslack LSM hook John Stultz
2016-07-18 20:17 ` Nick Kralevich
2016-07-18 20:23 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2016-07-18 20:43 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-20 6:12 ` James Morris [this message]
2016-07-21 5:54 ` John Stultz
2016-07-21 11:43 ` James Morris
2016-07-18 20:16 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2 v3] proc: Relax /proc/<tid>/timerslack_ns capability requirements Nick Kralevich
2016-07-18 20:22 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2016-07-18 20:41 ` Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LRH.2.20.1607201612020.23817@namei.org \
--to=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ccross@android.com \
--cc=dimitrysh@google.com \
--cc=enh@google.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=kandoiruchi@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nnk@google.com \
--cc=orenl@cellrox.com \
--cc=romlem@android.com \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tkjos@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.