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
| |