Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Jul 2007 07:56:53 -0500 | From | "Scott Preece" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface |
| |
On 7/19/07, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > If we could get a few (non-afilliated :) people who work with > > customers in the security field to tell us whether this is being > > used, that would be very helpful. Not sure how to get that. > > The mainline kernel does not cater to out of tree code.
Please distinguish between "cater to" and "support". If the kernel didn't worry about supporting out-of-tree code, then why would there be loadable module at all?
Christian Ehrhardt already pointed to two reasons for loadable LSMs that are sufficient to justify keeping them - so you can replace them iteratively while you're developing them or choose between alternatives.
Another twist is to use a tool to generate the module from a policy-definition file; this could be done at boot-time or could be done to replace the current policy on a running system (perhaps to add a new domain corresponding to a newly added service). Yes, this would need to be done with a lot of care, but part of providing mechanism (rather than policy) is enabling people to use the mechanism in the ways they prefer.
scott -- scott preece - 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/
| |