Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:36:50 -0400 (EDT) | From | James Morris <> | Subject | Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks |
| |
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Crispin Cowan wrote:
> SELinux has NSA legacy, and that is reflected in their inode design: it > is much better at protecting secrecy, which is the NSA's historic > mission.
No. The inode design is simply correct.
Consider the following:
What if Unix DAC security was implemented via pathnames, using a configuration file and regexp matching enginer in the kernel, invoked during file access, rather than the existing scheme of checking inode ownership and permission attributes?
SELinux labels objects directly because it's the right thing to do.
To also clarify: the legacy of SELinux is in the decades of research performed into providing more comprehensive security than the original secrecy-oriented TCSEC schemes. And conflating a highly loaded term such as "NSA's historic mission" with an implementation specific aspect of SELinux is useless in a technical discussion and IMHO totally inappropriate.
- James -- James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
- 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/
| |