lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/6] secmark: export binary yes/no rather than kernel internal secid
    From
    Date
    On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 10:50 +1000, James Morris wrote:
    > On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, Eric Paris wrote:

    > For the reasons above, I think the secctx string needs to be exported in
    > addition to this rather than instead of.

    I won't argue, I don't agree with your reasoning, but I'm not opposed to
    this result. We have 3 competing suggestions:

    Jan suggested we:
    completely eliminate secmark from procfs+netlink and only export secctx
    in netlink.

    Eric suggested we:
    completely eliminate secmark from procfs+netlink and then export secctx
    in procfs+netlink

    sounds like James suggested we:
    continue to export meaningless and confusing secmark from procfs+netlink
    and then export secctx in procfs+netlink as well.

    I'm going to implement James' idea and resend the patch series. Any
    strong objections?

    -Eric



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-09-27 20:11    [W:0.022 / U:0.476 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site