On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 1) The kthread doesn't look like it will perform well enough to handle > all lower opens. We could probably squeeze some extra performance out > of it but I think the better solution is to temporarily change creds, > do the lower open, and change back to the original cred. See callers > of prepare_creds() for examples of this. Yup, that was definitely my biggest concern with this change - thanks for the pointers, I'll take a look at what it'll take to replace the kthread with override_creds/revert_creds instead. > 2) I don't think that delegating open() is sufficient. What about inode > based operations such as chown()? I think that we'll have a very > similar problem. My impression was that this wasn't likely to be an issue since for normal filesystems, SELinux doesn't associate any contexts from the current task with inodes (task_sid in inode_security_struct should only be used for things like sockets or tmpfs - and the case of tmpfs, I think the resulting behavior is actually expected and correct under ecryptfs). Thanks, Ricky -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ecryptfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
