Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/6] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM) | From | david safford <> | Date | Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:14:35 -0500 |
| |
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 09:23 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting david safford (safford@watson.ibm.com): > > On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 12:42 +1100, James Morris wrote: > > > On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, david safford wrote: > > > > > > > These hooks were for alternate integrity modules, and since > > > > no one else has defended them, we have to agree that they > > > > should be replaced with direct calls. > > > > > > If you know of other modules which are planned to be ported to this > > > framework, merged upstream and supported, then this would be similar to > > > the situation when LSM was initially developed. > > > > > > You've previously mentioned some active projects here: > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/17/362 > > > > > > Are there any definite commitments to push these upstream when the > > > integrity framework is merged? > > > > All of the projects listed in that posting were ones depending on > > IMA, with no requirements for alternate modules. I do hope that there > > will be other integrity modules in addition to the TPM oriented IMA, > > and I do know of several research projects in this space, but I don't > > know if/when any of these are planning on submission. If others are > > submitted, it would certainly be simple to add the hooks back in. > > Too bad the main trusted knoppix site appears to be dead. Was it > actually making use of the templating api? > > -serge
I believe they are using an older version of IMA without templating, but either way really shouldn't affect them.
dave
| |