[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] remove sys_security
    David S. Miller wrote:

    >There is a very important fundamental difference to the USB case.
    >It eats zero space in my kernel when I have no USB devices.
    >CONFIG_USB=m works as designed!
    >CONFIG_SECURITY=m still does not exist, so distribution makers have to
    >make a y vs. n choice.
    This was our design goal for LSM: to be as minimally intrusive to the
    kernel as possible. We would LOVE to have a zero-footprint solution that
    allowed users to enable LSM when they need it. More precisely, LSM is
    that mechanism intended to impose as little overhead as possible with no
    modules loaded, and provide adequate access to the modules when they are

    LSM is not zero-footprint, but it is as low as we could make it. We are
    interested in ways to reduce the footprint, but that reduction needs to
    be looked at in cost/benefit terms: changes that have very little impact
    on footprint, but high impact on the functionality of the LSM interface.
    If you remove this system call, you will save almost nothing in kernel
    resources, but do a lot of damage to functionality.

    On the other hand, the complaints about the typing of the arguments are
    well taken, in the context of 32/64-bit porting issues. So what types
    should the arguments be? Abstractly, they are integers, in the
    mathematical sense. What is the preferred word-size-portalbe way to
    express that?


    Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    Chief Scientist, WireX
    Security Hardened Linux Distribution:
    Available for purchase:

    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.020 / U:6.220 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site