[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Extended Attributes for Security Modules against 2.5.68
    On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 12:15:17 PDT, Chris Wright <>  said:
    > * Andreas Dilger ( wrote:

    > > The only reason to use a common "" is if the actual data
    > > stored therein was usable by more than a single security module.
    > Or, as mentioned, if you care to print out the label with standard
    > fileutils.

    The requirement that things like ls, find, cp and so on know where to look
    for these things trumps any "purity of labels" arguments.

    In addition, a case can be made that different modules *should* use the
    same name - because that way when you're re-labelling a file system for
    a new security module, you can actually *detect* old crufty conflicting
    labels added by some previous module.

    "Warning: file %s was already labelled with attribute %s"

    If you do as Chris suggests, you can't implement this in a clean manner.
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:34    [W:0.018 / U:2.672 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site