Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Mar 2010 13:31:32 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: Upstream first policy |
| |
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, James Morris wrote: > > > it.. But that may have been more of the whole FUD thing from the people > > who for some unfathomable reason think that inodes are more important > > than pathnames. > > Hey, thanks for another random unfounded personal attack, it's really > appreciated.
It really isn't personal, you know. I don't even remember _who_ it was that thought that pathname-based security was fundamentally wrong and was bad-mouthing apparmor all they could. My point was just that there's a lot of mindless "my way or the highway" in some security circles, and apparmor really has been ridiculed.
It's not _that_ long ago that some group was trying to get rid of LSM just because "selinux is the only valid model".
Linus
| |