Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Aug 2010 09:01:45 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [AppArmor #7 0/13] AppArmor security module |
| |
On Thu 2010-08-05 20:27:24, James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Note that I added the patch below to update AA against the latest > > > version of path_truncate: > > > > Ok, so now we have two name-based "security" modules. Can we at least > > drop TOMOYO? That seems to have all apparmor disadvantages plus some > > more... > > No. The policy is that any security module which implements an access > control scheme and meets a well-defined security goal, and passes > technical review, may be merged. > > aka, The Arjan Protocol: > > http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Documenting_Security_Module_Intent
It seems that security subsystem has lower standards than rest of the kernel. Sad. Pavel
-- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
| |