lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From(David Wagner)
SubjectRe: [AppArmor 39/45] AppArmor: Profile loading and manipulation, pathname matching
DateSun, 24 Jun 2007 21:20:07 +0000 (UTC)
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 21:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2008