Re: [PATCH v5 3/8] proc: Use lsmids instead of lsm names for attrs
From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date: 2023-01-11 21:02:55
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, linux-security-module, lkml
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 1:09 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:
Use the LSM ID number instead of the LSM name to identify which security module's attibute data should be shown in /proc/self/attr. The security_[gs]etprocattr() functions have been changed to expect the LSM ID. The change from a string comparison to an integer comparison in these functions will provide a minor performance improvement. Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org --- fs/proc/base.c | 29 +++++++++++++++-------------- fs/proc/internal.h | 2 +- include/linux/security.h | 11 +++++------ security/security.c | 11 +++++------ 4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
...
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c index 9e479d7d202b..9328b6b07dfc 100644 --- a/fs/proc/base.c +++ b/fs/proc/base.c@@ -2837,27 +2838,27 @@ static const struct inode_operations proc_##LSM##_attr_dir_inode_ops = { \ #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_SMACK static const struct pid_entry smack_attr_dir_stuff[] = { - ATTR("smack", "current", 0666), + ATTR(LSM_ID_SMACK, "current", 0666), }; LSM_DIR_OPS(smack); #endif #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_APPARMOR static const struct pid_entry apparmor_attr_dir_stuff[] = { - ATTR("apparmor", "current", 0666), - ATTR("apparmor", "prev", 0444), - ATTR("apparmor", "exec", 0666), + ATTR(LSM_ID_APPARMOR, "current", 0666), + ATTR(LSM_ID_APPARMOR, "prev", 0444), + ATTR(LSM_ID_APPARMOR, "exec", 0666), }; LSM_DIR_OPS(apparmor); #endif static const struct pid_entry attr_dir_stuff[] = { - ATTR(NULL, "current", 0666), - ATTR(NULL, "prev", 0444), - ATTR(NULL, "exec", 0666), - ATTR(NULL, "fscreate", 0666), - ATTR(NULL, "keycreate", 0666), - ATTR(NULL, "sockcreate", 0666), + ATTR(0, "current", 0666), + ATTR(0, "prev", 0444), + ATTR(0, "exec", 0666), + ATTR(0, "fscreate", 0666), + ATTR(0, "keycreate", 0666), + ATTR(0, "sockcreate", 0666),
See the discussion in patch 1/8, we should use a macro instead of a 0 here (although the exact macro definition is very much up for discussion): ATTR(LSM_ID_UNDEF, "current", 0666), -- paul-moore.com