Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Adding the SELinux mailing list to the CC line; in the future please > include the SELinux mailing list on patches like this. It would also > be very helpful to include "selinux" somewhere in the subject line > when the patch is predominately SELinux related (much like you did for > the other LSMs in this patchset). I should probably evict the SELinux bits into their own patch since the point of this patch is the LSM hooks, not specifically SELinux's implementation thereof. > I can't say I've digested all of this yet, but what SELinux testing > have you done with this patchset? Using the fsopen()/fsmount() syscalls, these hooks will be made use of, say for NFS (which I haven't included in this list). Even sys_mount() will make use of them a bit, so just booting the system does that. Note that for SELinux these hooks don't change very much except how the parameters are handled. It doesn't actually change the checks that are made - at least, not yet. There are some additional syscalls under consideration (such as the ability to pick a live mounted filesystem into a context) that might require additional permits. David
