Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:47:41 -0700 | | From | Greg KH <> | | Subject | Re: [RFC] cgroups: implement device whitelist lsm (v2) | |
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 08:41:21PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting James Morris (jmorris@namei.org):
> > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> >
> > > Quoting James Morris (jmorris@namei.org):
> > > > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > True, but while this change simplifies the code a bit, the semantics
> > > > > seem more muddled - devcg will be enforcing when CONFIG_CGROUP_DEV=y
> > > > > and:
> > > > >
> > > > > SECURITY=n or
> > > > > rootplug is enabled
> > > > > capabilities is enabled
> > > > > smack is enabled
> > > > > selinux+capabilities is enabled
> > > >
> > > > Well, this is how real systems are going to be deployed.
> > >
> > > Sorry, do you mean with capabilities?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > All Fedora, RHEL, CentOS etc. ship with SELinux+capabilities. I can't
> > imagine not enabling them on other kernels.
> >
> > > > It becomes confusing, IMHO, if you have to change which secondary LSM you
> > > > stack with SELinux to enable a cgroup feature.
> > >
> > > So you're saying selinux without capabilities should still be able to
> > > use dev_cgroup? (Just making sure I understand right)
> >
> > Nope, SELinux always stacks with capabilities, so havng the cgroup hooks
> > in capabilities makes sense (rather than having us change the secondary
> > stacking LSM just to enable a feature).
>
> Oh, ok.
>
> Will let the patch stand until Pavel and Greg comment then.
My main question was why was that file in the kernel/ directory?
Shouldn't that also be in the security/ directory?
And to be honest, I didn't really look at it at all other than the
diffstat to make sure you weren't messing with the kobj_map stuff
anymore :)
thanks,
greg k-h
|  |