[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:0.062 / U:1.524 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site