On 11/25/20 1:04 PM, KP Singh wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 6:35 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> wrote:
On 11/24/20 7:12 AM, KP Singh wrote:
From: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx>
This is in preparation to add a helper for BPF LSM programs to use
IMA hashes when attached to LSM hooks. There are LSM hooks like
inode_unlink which do not have a struct file * argument and cannot
use the existing ima_file_hash API.
An inode based API is, therefore, useful in LSM based detections like an
executable trying to delete itself which rely on the inode_unlink LSM
hook.
Moreover, the ima_file_hash function does nothing with the struct file
pointer apart from calling file_inode on it and converting it to an
inode.
Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx>
There is no change for this patch compared to previous version,
so you can carry my Ack.
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx>
I am guessing:
* We need an Ack from Mimi/James.
Yes.
* As regards to which tree, I guess bpf-next would be better since the
BPF helper and the selftest depends on it
Yep, bpf-next is my preference as otherwise we're running into unnecessary
merge conflicts.
Thanks,
Daniel
