Re: [PATCH resend] define convenient securebits masks for prctl users
flat view
From: Stephen Rothwell <hidden>
Date: 2009-10-29 02:33:11
Also in:
lkml
Hi Serge, On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:02:36 -0500 "Serge E. Hallyn" [off-list ref] wrote:
[ Are there any objections to exporting securebits.h? If not, can this patch be pushed to linux-next? ]
I am not sure which tree this belongs in? Maybe security-testing (James cc'd)?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/include/linux/securebits.h b/include/linux/securebits.h index d2c5ed8..9ad109e 100644 --- a/include/linux/securebits.h +++ b/include/linux/securebits.h@@ -1,6 +1,13 @@ #ifndef _LINUX_SECUREBITS_H #define _LINUX_SECUREBITS_H 1 +/* Each securesetting is implemented using two bits. One bit specifies + whether the setting is on or off. The other bit specify whether the + setting is locked or not. A setting which is locked cannot be + changed from user-level. */ +#define issecure_mask(X) (1 << (X)) +#define issecure(X) (issecure_mask(X) & current_cred_xxx(securebits))
You want this second define protected by ifdef __KERNEL__ ... -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachments
- (unnamed) [application/pgp-signature] 198 bytes