[RFC PATCH 2/2] integrity: double check iint_cache was initialized

Mimi Zohar zohar at linux.ibm.com
Tue Mar 23 16:13:22 UTC 2021

On Wed, 2021-03-24 at 00:14 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2021/03/23 23:47, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Initially I also questioned making "integrity" an LSM.  Perhaps it's
> > time to reconsider.   For now, it makes sense to just fix the NULL
> > pointer dereferencing.
> Do we think calling panic() as "fix the NULL pointer dereferencing" ?

Not supplying "integrity" as an "lsm=" option is a user error.  There
are only two options - allow or deny the caller to proceed.   If the
user is expecting the integrity subsystem to be properly working,
returning a NULL and allowing the system to boot (RFC patch version)
does not make sense.   Better to fail early.


More information about the Linux-security-module-archive mailing list