On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 2:00 PM Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2019-01-17 at 15:34 -0600, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: > > On 13:47 18/12, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > If tmpfiles can be made persistent, then newly created tmpfiles need to > > > be treated like any other new files in policy. > > > > > > This patch indicates which newly created tmpfiles are in policy, causing > > > the file hash to be calculated on __fput(). > > > > Discussed in overlayfs, this would be better if we use this on inode > > and called from vfs_tmpfile() instead of do_tmpfile(). This will cover > > the overlayfs case which uses tmpfiles while performing copy_up(). > > The patch is attached. > > > > Here is the updated patch which works for my cases. > > However, it is the the failure case after setting the IMA flags > > I am concerned about, though I don't think that should be as harmful. > > Right. The new IMA hook allocates memory for storing the flags, which > needs to be cleaned up on failure. For this reason, the IMA call is > deferred until after the transition from locally freeing memory on > failure to relying on __fput(). In "do_last", the call to IMA is > after "opened"; and in the original version of this patch the call to > IMA is after finish_open(). > Not sure I understand the concern. The integrity context is associated with the inode and will be freed on destroy_inode() no matter which error path is taken. Am I missing something? Thanks, Amir.
