On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 06:43:43PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 4:25 PM Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean)
> <sforshee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean) <sforshee@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > security/security.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> First off, you've got to write *something* for the commit description,
> even if it is just a single sentence.
>
> > diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> > index 0d210da9862c..f515d8430318 100644
> > --- a/security/security.c
> > +++ b/security/security.c
> > @@ -2365,9 +2365,14 @@ int security_inode_remove_acl(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
> > int security_inode_set_fscaps(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, struct dentry *dentry,
> > const struct vfs_caps *caps, int flags)
> > {
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > if (unlikely(IS_PRIVATE(d_backing_inode(dentry))))
> > return 0;
> > - return call_int_hook(inode_set_fscaps, 0, idmap, dentry, caps, flags);
> > + ret = call_int_hook(inode_set_fscaps, 0, idmap, dentry, caps, flags);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + return evm_inode_set_fscaps(idmap, dentry, caps, flags);
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > @@ -2387,6 +2392,7 @@ void security_inode_post_set_fscaps(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
> > if (unlikely(IS_PRIVATE(d_backing_inode(dentry))))
> > return;
> > call_void_hook(inode_post_set_fscaps, idmap, dentry, caps, flags);
> > + evm_inode_post_set_fscaps(idmap, dentry, caps, flags);
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > @@ -2415,9 +2421,14 @@ int security_inode_get_fscaps(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, struct dentry *dentry)
> > */
> > int security_inode_remove_fscaps(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, struct dentry *dentry)
> > {
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > if (unlikely(IS_PRIVATE(d_backing_inode(dentry))))
> > return 0;
> > - return call_int_hook(inode_remove_fscaps, 0, idmap, dentry);
> > + ret = call_int_hook(inode_remove_fscaps, 0, idmap, dentry);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + return evm_inode_remove_fscaps(dentry);
> > }
>
> If you take a look at linux-next or the LSM tree's dev branch you'll
> see that we've gotten rid of the dedicated IMA and EVM hooks,
> promoting both IMA and EVM to "proper" LSMs that leverage the existing
> LSM hook infrastructure. In this patchset, and moving forward, please
> don't add dedicated IMA/EVM hooks like this, instead register them as
> LSM hook implementations with LSM_HOOK_INIT().
Yeah, I'm aware that work was going on and got applied recently. I've
been assuming this change will go in through the vfs tree though, and I
wasn't sure how you and Al/Christian would want to handle that
dependency between your trees, so I held off on updating based off the
LSM tree. I'm happy to update this for the next round though.
Thanks,
Seth
