Thread (26 messages) flat view 26 messages, 4 authors, 2020-07-20

Re: [PATCH v3 01/12] ima: Have the LSM free its audit rule

From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Date: 2020-07-19 11:02:50
Also in: linux-integrity, lkml

On Fri, 2020-07-17 at 14:24 -0500, Tyler Hicks wrote:
On 2020-07-17 15:20:22, Nayna wrote:
quoted
On 7/9/20 2:19 AM, Tyler Hicks wrote:
quoted
Ask the LSM to free its audit rule rather than directly calling kfree().
Is it to be called audit rule or filter rule ?  Likewise in subject line.
gt
The security hooks call this "audit rule" but Mimi explained the
reasoning for IMA referring to this as an "audit filter" here:

 https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1593466203.5085.62.camel@linux.ibm.com/ (local)

I would be fine with her renaming/rewording this patch, accordingly, in
next-integrity-testing.
Both here and "ima: AppArmor satisfies the audit rule requirements",
the subject is AppArmor/LSM, which do refer to the rules as "audit"
rules.  In the "ima: Rename internal audit rule functions" case, the
rule rename is internal to IMA.  Here it makes sense to replace
"audit" with "filter".  Tyler, I've gone ahead and made the change.

Mimi
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help