[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Out of tree module using LSM
    Tvrtko A. Ursulin wrote:
    > During one recent LKML discussion
    > ( about
    > LSM going
    > static you called for LSM users to speak up.
    Great big clue: If "LSM" is in the subject line, then cc: the LSM list

    For LSM readers seeing this for the first time, the thread starts here
    and goes for a while

    I'm sympathetic to the desire to be able to provide a 3rd party LSM that
    end users can install on their systems. That is why I advocated for
    keeping the dynamic LSM interface. Getting the dynamic interface
    restored faces a lot of challenges, but I hope that some kind of
    solution can be found, because the alternative is to effectively force
    vendors like Sophos to do it the "dirty" way by fishing in memory for
    the syscall table. I would much rather that Linux offers you a way to do
    what you need to do than force you to do nasty things.


    Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    CEO, Mercenary Linux
    Itanium. Vista. GPLv3. Complexity at work

    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: 2007-11-30 21:55    [W:0.020 / U:1.932 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site