Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Fw: signed kernel modules? | From | Josh Boyer <> | Date | Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:46:06 -0500 |
| |
On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 11:59, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > The technical details are that "signed", "sealed", "certified", > relate to policy. For years policy was not allowed to be included in > the kernel. In recent times, the kernel has become filthy with > policy.
I'd disagree. Do you consider SELinux to be policy as well just because it's in the kernel?
As David said in his response, it's a mechanism. Whether _you_ choose to use it or not decides the "policy". That's why I said put a config option around it. You would still have _choice_.
> it right. What's right for you is wrong for another.
Absolutely. So why are you trying to prevent people that want to use module signing from doing so?
josh
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |