On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, David P. Quigley wrote: > On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 22:43 +1100, James Morris wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, David P. Quigley wrote: > > > > > We tried to change this to be dynamically allocated based on what was > > > coming off of the wire but we ran into a problem that it required us to > > > do allocations where they really shouldn't be done in the rpc/nfsv4 > > > code. Trond suggested to make this static and that if someone really > > > needed more than a page for their label that something was horrifically > > > wrong. I'm tempted to agree with him on this but there are people trying > > > to send contexts with an MLS component with every other compartment set > > > which tend to be really large. > > > > Well, future labels might include cryptographic information, for example. > > > > <removing people from the CC who probably don't care about this> > > Could you expand on why this might be needed or what applications would > use this? It's unclear to me what sort of crypto information would be in > a context. I know the ecryptfs guys were trying to make crypto decisions > based on SELinux context in some cases but I never heard of wanting to > put that kind of information into the context. Potentially as part of a mandatory cryptographic policy, although the exact form of the labeling is unknown. But the main point is that we should not needlessly limit the flexibility of the system. -- James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
