[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Security hooks, "standard linux security" & embedded use
At 19:47 12/07/2001, Greg KH wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 07:37:36PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> >
> > This seems very good in view of implementing ACL support for NTFS, too. -
> > We have all the NTFS layout knowledge to do it now. We just lack the
> > kernel/user space infrastructure.
> >
> > When designing this modular security infrastructure it would be useful if
> > it is made generic enough to allow callbacks into user space for
> permission
> > checking.
>The current model lets you do whatever you want in your kernel module.
>It imposes no policy, that's up to you.

Ok, that's fair enough. A wrapper module could always be written that then
in turn invokes user space. That's good enough for me although it makes for
additional overhead but I guess that is not too bad.

>All the better to keep userspace callbacks for security out of my
>kernels, for that way is ripe for problems (for specific examples why,
>see the linux-security-module mailing list archives.)

Oh, sure. There are problems. I don't deny that. But I am not too sure that
those problems outweigh the problems created by putting in huge amounts of
code into the kernel which could live outside it just as well. - IMHO the
kernel should be as small as possible rather than contain everything under
the sun just because it's easier to do that way...

Best regards,


"Nothing succeeds like success." - Alexandre Dumas
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS Maintainer / WWW:
ICQ: 8561279 / WWW:

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:57    [W:0.047 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site