[RFC PATCH v4 08/15] landlock: add support network rules
Mickaël Salaün
mic at digikod.net
Mon Apr 11 16:20:51 UTC 2022
On 11/04/2022 15:44, Konstantin Meskhidze wrote:
>
>
> 4/8/2022 7:30 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
[...]
>>> struct landlock_ruleset *landlock_create_ruleset(const struct
>>> landlock_access_mask *access_mask_set)
>>> {
>>> struct landlock_ruleset *new_ruleset;
>>>
>>> /* Informs about useless ruleset. */
>>> - if (!access_mask_set->fs)
>>> + if (!access_mask_set->fs && !access_mask_set->net)
>>> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMSG);
>>> new_ruleset = create_ruleset(1);
>>> - if (!IS_ERR(new_ruleset))
>>
>> This is better:
>>
>> if (IS_ERR(new_ruleset))
>> return new_ruleset;
>> if (access_mask_set->fs)
>> ...
>
> I dont get this condition. Do you mean that we return new_ruleset
> anyway no matter what the masks's values are? So its possible to have 0
> masks values, is't it?
No, the logic is correct but it would be simpler to exit as soon as
there is a ruleset error, you don't need to duplicate
"IS_ERR(new_ruleset) &&":
if (IS_ERR(new_ruleset))
return new_ruleset;
if (access_mask_set->fs)
landlock_set_fs_access_mask(new_ruleset, access_mask_set, 0);
if (access_mask_set->net)
landlock_set_net_access_mask(new_ruleset, access_mask_set, 0);
return new_ruleset;
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list