Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> [I'm still not sure what selinux want to do. normally inode_permission() >> should check truncate() permission, and this FILE__SIZE checks something >> again...? And we want to check FILE__WRITE for ATTR_[AMC]TIME?] > > Explicit setting of mode, owner, group, or timestamps is to be checked > by the setattr permission, while implicit setting of timestamps or size > is mediated by the write permission. E.g. mode change has implicit ATTR_CTIME change. So it meant, we should check the both of FILE__SETATTR and FILE__WRITE? > ATTR_FORCE is supposed to suppress permission checking altogether, and > shouldn't be mixed with multiple attribute changes if some should be > subject to permission checks while others should not. I disagree. In fact, ATTR_FORCE is just used for ATTR_KILL_S[UG]ID, and notify_change() is disallowing the mixed ATTR_MODE and ATTR_KILL_*. I think it should be enough. If ATTR_FORCE is confusable, I think we can just add new ATTR_FORCE_MODE or ATTR_FORCE_KILL, and replace with current ATTR_FORCE. I'm ok either way. But, with this change, ATTR_FORCE has no users. Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- 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
