Re: [PATCH] LSM: Add security_socket_post_accept() and security_socket_post_recv_datagram().

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Tetsuo Handa
Date: Thursday, April 23, 2009 - 7:07 pm

David Miller wrote:

I found that "man 2 select" says

  Under Linux, select() may report a socket file descriptor as "ready for
  reading", while nevertheless a subsequent read blocks. This could for example
  happen when data has arrived but upon examination has wrong checksum and is
  discarded. There may be other circumstances in which a file descriptor is
  spuriously reported as ready. Thus it may be safer to use O_NONBLOCK on
  sockets that should not block.

  Linux 2.6.16                   2006-03-11                      SELECT(2)

People cannot use "poll()" to avoid blocking.
Applications had better not to completely depend on what poll() says.

You don't like TOMOYO's concept. I see.
But I don't see the reason you can't accept this proposal.
What does this proposal break? Please explain me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 2/2] tomoyo: Add network access control support., Tetsuo Handa, (Wed Apr 15, 3:51 am)
Re: [PATCH] LSM: Add security_socket_post_accept() and sec ..., Tetsuo Handa, (Thu Apr 23, 7:07 pm)