[RFC PATCH] lsm,selinux: pass the family information along with xfrm flow

[James Morris]

On Tue, 29 Sep 2020, Paul Moore wrote:

> As pointed out by Herbert in a recent related patch, the LSM hooks
> should pass the address family in addition to the xfrm flow as the
> family information is needed to safely access the flow.
> 
> While this is not technically a problem for the current LSM/SELinux
> code as it only accesses fields common to all address families, we
> should still pass the address family so that the LSM hook isn't
> inherently flawed.  An alternate solution could be to simply pass
> the LSM secid instead of flow, but this introduces the problem of
> the LSM hook callers sending the wrong secid which would be much
> worse.
> 
> Reported-by: Herbert Xu <herbert at gondor.apana.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Moore <paul at paul-moore.com>

I'm not keen on adding a parameter which nobody is using. Perhaps a note 
in the header instead?

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris at namei.org>