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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans