[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: LSM conversion to static interface

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Non-trivial modules (i.e., practically everything beyond capabilities) become
> effective only after loading policy, anyway. If you can load policy, you can
> as well first load a security module without making the system insecure.

I'd like to note that I asked people who were actually affected, and had
examples of their real-world use to step forward and explain their use,
and that I explicitly mentioned that this is something we can easily

But I also note that you did no such thing, neither has anybody else.

The fact is, security people *are* insane. You just argue all the time,
instead fo doing anything productive. So please don't include me in the Cc
on your insane arguments - instead do something productive and I'm

Ok? That was the whole point of LSM in the first place. I'm *not*
interested in getting roped into your insane arguments. I'm interested in
moving forward and having real examples of real use and code. Until then,
this issue is closed. I thought I had made that clear already, but
apparently not clear enough.

So I repeat: we can undo that commit, but I will damn well not care one
whit about yet another pointless security model flamewar.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-19 22:43    [W:0.080 / U:21.036 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site