Re: [AppArmor 39/45] AppArmor: Profile loading and manipulation, pathname matching

2007-06-04 Thread Andreas Gruenbacher
On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:20, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > Pathname matching, transition table loading, profile loading and > > manipulation. > > So we get small interpretter of state machines, and reason we need is > is 'apparmor is misdesigned and works with paths when it should have > worke

Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

2007-06-04 Thread Andreas Gruenbacher
On Monday 04 June 2007 15:12, Pavel Machek wrote: > How will kernel work with very long paths? I'd suspect some problems, > if path is 1MB long and I attempt to print it in /proc > somewhere. Pathnames are only used for informational purposes in the kernel, except in AppArmor of course. /proc onl

Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

2007-06-04 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > > You very well know that the vfs has a limit of PATH_MAX characters (4096) > > > for pathnames. This means that at most that many characters can be passed > > > at once. > > What users can do is something like this: > > chdir("some/long/path"); > chdir("some/even/longer/path"); >

Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

2007-06-04 Thread Andreas Gruenbacher
On Monday 04 June 2007 13:35, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Mon 2007-06-04 13:25:30, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > On Monday 04 June 2007 12:55, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > On Wed 2007-05-23 18:16:45, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:14, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > Why is th

Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

2007-06-04 Thread Pavel Machek
On Mon 2007-06-04 13:25:30, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > On Monday 04 June 2007 12:55, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Wed 2007-05-23 18:16:45, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > > On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:14, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Why is this configurable? > > > > > > The maximum length of a pathnam

Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

2007-06-04 Thread Andreas Gruenbacher
On Monday 04 June 2007 12:55, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Wed 2007-05-23 18:16:45, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:14, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Why is this configurable? > > > > The maximum length of a pathname is an arbitrary limit: we don't want to > > allocate arbitrary am

Re: [AppArmor 38/45] AppArmor: Module and LSM hooks

2007-06-04 Thread Pavel Machek
On Wed 2007-05-23 18:16:45, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:14, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Why is this configurable? > > The maximum length of a pathname is an arbitrary limit: we don't want to > allocate arbitrary amounts of of kernel memory for pathnames so we introduce >