> YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> >> do you want me to put proc_isunder() back in the callers rather than the
> >> secmodel for now?
> > 
> > yes.
> > 
> >> also, other than the above, is it okay to commit?
> > 
> > i haven't read the new one yet.
> 
> attached new patch, reverting the proc_isunder() changes.

can you add <r/w> argument at least, so that it doesn't change
the current behaviour?
(unless you have an argument to change the current behaviour.)

> btw, isn't it better to remove all kauth_authorize_process() calls in
> sys_ptrace(), and just use one at the top?

i'm not sure.

YAMAMOTO Takashi