Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr

2016-06-24 Thread Paul Moore
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Casey Schaufler > wrote: >> On 6/24/2016 12:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Casey Schaufler >>> wrote: >>>> Subject: [PATCH v4 2/

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr

2016-06-24 Thread Kees Cook
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 6/24/2016 12:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Casey Schaufler >> wrote: >>> Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr >>> >>> Back in 2007 I m

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr

2016-06-24 Thread Casey Schaufler
On 6/24/2016 12:11 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Casey Schaufler > wrote: >> Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr >> >> Back in 2007 I made what turned out to be a rather serious >> mistake in the implementatio

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr

2016-06-24 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr > > Back in 2007 I made what turned out to be a rather serious > mistake in the implementation of the Smack security module. > The SELinux module used an interf

[PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr

2016-06-23 Thread Casey Schaufler
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] LSM: module hierarchy in /proc/.../attr Back in 2007 I made what turned out to be a rather serious mistake in the implementation of the Smack security module. The SELinux module used an interface in /proc to manipulate the security context on processes. Rather than use a