Re: More KAUTH_GENERIC_ISSUSER replacements

[Elad Efrat <elad%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 2:59 AM, matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost> 
wrote:
>
>   On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:44 AM, matthew green 
> <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost> wrote:
>   >
>   >     - KAUTH_SYSTEM_MOUNT::KAUTH_REQ_SYSTEM_MOUNT_UMAP: special request for
>   >       mounting a umapfs. See miscfs/umapfs/umap_vfsops.c.
>   >
>   >
>   > i don't like this one.  it is extremely specific and only applies to
>   > a filesystem that almost nobody uses.  i don't see why umapfs has any
>   > difference to any other fs or mount user, is there any particular
>   > reason it needs to be special cased?
>
>   I don't like it either, but this is a special case, yes. See:
>
>   
> http://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/security/advisories/NetBSD-SA1999-006.txt.asc
>
>   and
>
>   
> http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/miscfs/umapfs/umap_vfsops.c#rev1.21
>
>
> in this case, i'd rather some non-FS specific name that would also
> be useful for other code that implements umapfs-like-functionality.
>
> that's really as simple as calling it KAUTH_REQ_SYSTEM_MOUNT_USERMAP
> or something, i guess.

No problem, we'll call it that way.

> (hmm, doesn't nfs have some of this in newer versions?)

I don't know, do we have newer versions of nfs in our tree? :)

Thanks,

-e.