[lkml]   [1996]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Misc Fixes
> I don't want to make it _trivial_ to get at the secure-level, and I think it's
> _wrong_ for a module to depend on it (I broke down and added it anyway, because
> I haven't gotten the _right_ fix for it, dammit you lazy people!).

It is already trivial. The offset of securelevel references in code of
functions a module can access is near enough a constant

> Not allowing module loads is reasonable, actually. That does NOT change the
> fact that no module should access "securelevel", which is the original problem.

Yes. Allowing module loads has to be blocked by securelevel

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.104 / U:0.260 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site