Re: [PATCH 1/1] file capabilities: don't ensure we break with 64-bit caps

2007-08-09 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
Quoting Andrew Morgan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Serge E. Hallyn wrote: The code you are contemplating now which reserves a magic number for 64-bits and we can't use that magic number; we've created a legacy we can't use. I think that's very

Re: [PATCH 1/1] file capabilities: don't ensure we break with 64-bit caps

2007-08-09 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
Quoting Andrew Morgan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Serge E. Hallyn wrote: Then, after all, perhaps it is time to just introduce file capabilities with a simultaneous kernel change to 64-bits now, while all this support is experimental? Well we

Fwd: Re: Upstreaming shared LSM interfaces

2007-08-09 Thread Casey Schaufler
--- Casey Schaufler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 11:43:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Casey Schaufler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Upstreaming shared LSM interfaces To: David P. Quigley [EMAIL PROTECTED], Stephen Smalley [EMAIL PROTECTED], James Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED],

Re: [PATCH 11/14] CacheFiles: Permit an inode's security ID to be obtained [try #2]

2007-08-09 Thread Casey Schaufler
--- James Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, David Howells wrote: James Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David, I've looked at the code and can't see that you need to access the label itself outside the LSM. Could you instead simply pass the inode pointer