On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:24:14AM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> This is a proof of concept to expose optional values that could depend
> of the process access rights.
>
> There is two dedicated flags: LANDLOCK_FLAG_ACCESS_SKB_READ and
> LANDLOCK_FLAG_ACCESS_SKB_WRITE. Each of them can be activated to access
> eBPF functions manipulating a skb in a read or write way.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@xxxxxxxxxxx>
...
> /* Handle check flags */
> #define LANDLOCK_FLAG_FS_DENTRY (1 << 0)
> @@ -619,12 +621,15 @@ struct landlock_handle {
> * @args: LSM hook arguments, see include/linux/lsm_hooks.h for there
> * description and the LANDLOCK_HOOK* definitions from
> * security/landlock/lsm.c for their types.
> + * @opt_skb: optional skb pointer, accessible with the
> + * LANDLOCK_FLAG_ACCESS_SKB_* flags for network-related hooks.
> */
> struct landlock_data {
> __u32 hook; /* enum landlock_hook_id */
> __u16 origin; /* LANDLOCK_FLAG_ORIGIN_* */
> __u16 cookie; /* seccomp RET_LANDLOCK */
> __u64 args[6];
> + __u64 opt_skb;
> };
missing something here.
This patch doesn't make use of it.
That's something for the future?
How that field will be populated?
Why make it different vs the rest or args[6] ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
