lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [AppArmor 39/45] AppArmor: Profile loading and manipulation, pathname matching
    Date
    James Morris  wrote:
    >The point is that the pathname model does not generalize, and that
    >AppArmor's inability to provide adequate coverage of the system is a
    >design issue arising from this.

    I don't see it. I don't see why you call this a design issue. Isn't
    this just a case where they haven't gotten around to implementing
    network and IPC mediation yet? How is that a design issue arising
    from a pathname-based model? For instance, one system I built (Janus)
    provided complete mediation, including mediation of network and IPC,
    yet it too used a pathname model for its policy file when describing
    the policy for the filesystem. That seems to contradict your statement.
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-06-24 23:25    [W:2.547 / U:0.072 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site