From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>
Cc: Scott Mayhew <smayhew@redhat.com>,
SElinux list <selinux@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-nfs <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] selinux: Fix selinux_sb_mnt_opts_compat()
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 21:25:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhQKVdbLNn=eOqebWaktDVeq5bjTjXea68MmcAhKoSa09w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFqZXNv7=ROfyzZGojy2DQvY0xp4Dd5oHW_0KG6BLiD7A8zeKQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:54 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com> wrote:
> I wonder if we could make this all much simpler by *always* doing the
> label parsing in selinux_add_opt() and just returning an error when
> !selinux_initialized(&selinux_state). Before the new mount API, mount
> options were always passed directly to the mount(2) syscall, so it
> wasn't possible to pass any SELinux mount options before the SELinux
> policy was loaded. I don't see why we need to jump through hoops here
> just to support this pseudo-feature of stashing an unparsed label into
> an fs_context before policy is loaded... Userspace should never need
> to do that.
I could agree with that, although part of my mind is a little nervous
about the "userspace should *never* ..." because that always seems to
bite us. Although I'm struggling to think of a case where userspace
would need to set explicit SELinux mount options without having a
policy loaded.
--
paul-moore.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-28 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-20 21:49 [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] selinux: parse sids earlier to avoid doing memory allocations under spinlock Scott Mayhew
2022-01-20 21:49 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] selinux: Fix selinux_sb_mnt_opts_compat() Scott Mayhew
2022-01-24 21:27 ` Paul Moore
2022-01-25 17:30 ` Scott Mayhew
2022-01-25 17:45 ` Paul Moore
2022-01-25 18:51 ` Scott Mayhew
2022-01-25 22:32 ` Paul Moore
2022-01-26 20:41 ` Scott Mayhew
2022-01-28 1:53 ` Paul Moore
2022-01-27 9:54 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2022-01-28 2:25 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2022-01-31 12:46 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2022-01-31 16:16 ` Paul Moore
2022-02-01 14:38 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2022-02-01 16:19 ` Paul Moore
2022-01-20 21:49 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/2] selinux: try to use preparsed sid before calling parse_sid() Scott Mayhew
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='CAHC9VhQKVdbLNn=eOqebWaktDVeq5bjTjXea68MmcAhKoSa09w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=smayhew@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).