[PATCH 220.127.116.11 1/1][RFC] ipt_owner: inode match supporting both
incoming and outgoing packets
kaber at trash.net
Sat Feb 18 21:07:47 CET 2006
Török Edwin wrote:
> On Saturday 18 February 2006 21:28, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>Besides the tasklist_lock issues, there is no 1:1 relationship between
>>sockets and processes, which is why this can never work. You don't know
>>which process is going to receive a packet until it calls recvmsg().
> Can sockets be "labeled". Like creating a label for each process, and then
> apply a label to each socket they open. If a socket gets shared, then it gets
> multiple labels.
> I see that you talk about SELinux labels below, but is there a way to "label"
> anything without using SELinux? (Maybe by writing another LSM module that
> does just this socket labeling?)
> I could then just check the labels to see if a packet is allowed to pass/ or
I'm not familiar with SElinux, so I don't know.
>>There is some work in progress to solve this problem in a different way,
>>by adding new hooks to the protocols that get the socket as context,
>>and using SElinux labels instead of process names/inodes/whatever for
> Could you tell me on which thread/mailing list this discussion/(work in
> progress) is taking place? I'd like to follow it.
There has been some discussion on netdev and netfilter-devel. I'm
currently porting the patches to a current tree and fixing the
remaining problems, I'll probably post them to netdev in a week or
More information about the netfilter-devel