Re: New skb extension for use by LSMs (skb "security blob")?
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: 2019-08-22 21:59:41
Also in:
netdev, selinux
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: 2019-08-22 21:59:41
Also in:
netdev, selinux
On 8/22/2019 2:18 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:35:01 -0700quoted
If the secmark where replaced by a security blob, the u32 secmark field in an sk_buff would be replaced by a void * security field.You can already use the secmark to hash to some kind of pointer or other object.
Would you really want that used in the most common configuration? Sure, you *can* do that, but it would be insane to do so.