lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] 3 of 5 IMA: LSM-based measurement code


    --- serue@us.ibm.com wrote:

    > Ok, so to be clear, any module which does not
    > directly impose some form
    > of access control is not eligible for an LSM?

    In particular, an additional access control.
    LSM is not for changing the existing policy,
    it is for imposing additional policy.

    You could, of course, add code to act on the
    integrity measurements you've made, in which
    case you could be in conformance with the
    stated eligibilty requirements.

    > (in that case that clearly settles the issue)

    It sure took the wind out of the sails for the
    SGI audit implementation.



    Casey Schaufler
    casey@schaufler-ca.com

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-06-16 00:11    [W:0.020 / U:88.168 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site