On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Sebastien Buisson
wrote:
> 2017-05-17 18:04 GMT+02:00 William Roberts :
>> I'm assuming in the Lustre code you're going to call security_policy_brief(),
>> how would the caller know how big that buffer is going to be?
>
> We can determine it at configure time for
2017-05-17 18:04 GMT+02:00 William Roberts :
> I'm assuming in the Lustre code you're going to call security_policy_brief(),
> how would the caller know how big that buffer is going to be?
We can determine it at configure time for instance, given that len as
an output parameter would give the size
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 9:04 AM, William Roberts
wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Sebastien Buisson
> wrote:
>> 2017-05-17 17:34 GMT+02:00 William Roberts :
>>> Is there a particular reason to not just return policybrief_len here as
>>> well, for consistency in the interface? Ho
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Sebastien Buisson
wrote:
> 2017-05-17 17:34 GMT+02:00 William Roberts :
>> Is there a particular reason to not just return policybrief_len here as
>> well, for consistency in the interface? How do you intend to use this
>> value in the caller?
>
>>
2017-05-17 17:34 GMT+02:00 William Roberts :
> Is there a particular reason to not just return policybrief_len here as
> well, for consistency in the interface? How do you intend to use this
> value in the caller?
As called in the other patch to expose policy brief via selinu
On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 16:59 +0200, Sebastien Buisson wrote:
> 2017-05-16 22:40 GMT+02:00 Stephen Smalley :
> > > + strcpy(*brief, policydb.policybrief);
> > > + /* *len is the length of the output string */
> > > + *len = policybrief_len - 1;
> >
> > Is there a particular reason to not
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Sebastien Buisson
wrote:
> 2017-05-17 17:09 GMT+02:00 William Roberts :
>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Sebastien Buisson
>> wrote:
>>> 2017-05-16 22:40 GMT+02:00 Stephen Smalley :
> + strcpy(*brief, policydb.policybrief);
> + /* *len is the le
2017-05-17 17:09 GMT+02:00 William Roberts :
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Sebastien Buisson
> wrote:
>> 2017-05-16 22:40 GMT+02:00 Stephen Smalley :
+ strcpy(*brief, policydb.policybrief);
+ /* *len is the length of the output string */
+ *len = policybrief_len - 1
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Sebastien Buisson
wrote:
> 2017-05-16 22:40 GMT+02:00 Stephen Smalley :
>>> + strcpy(*brief, policydb.policybrief);
>>> + /* *len is the length of the output string */
>>> + *len = policybrief_len - 1;
>>
>> Is there a particular reason to not just retu
2017-05-16 22:40 GMT+02:00 Stephen Smalley :
>> + strcpy(*brief, policydb.policybrief);
>> + /* *len is the length of the output string */
>> + *len = policybrief_len - 1;
>
> Is there a particular reason to not just return policybrief_len here as
> well, for consistency in the interfac
On Tue, 2017-05-16 at 18:51 +0900, Sebastien Buisson wrote:
> Add policybrief field to struct policydb. It holds a brief info
> of the policydb, made of colon separated name and value pairs
> that give information about how the policy is applied in the
> security module(s).
> Note that the ordering
Add policybrief field to struct policydb. It holds a brief info
of the policydb, made of colon separated name and value pairs
that give information about how the policy is applied in the
security module(s).
Note that the ordering of the fields in the string may change.
Policy brief is computed eve
12 matches
Mail list logo
