Re: [PATCH] 3 of 5 IMA: LSM-based measurement code

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Quoting Chris Wright ([email protected]):
> * [email protected] ([email protected]) wrote:
> > Quoting Chris Wright ([email protected]):
> > > The primary purpose of the hooks is access control.  Some of them, of
> > > course, are helpers to keep labels coherent.  IIRC, James objected
> > > because the measurement data was simply collected from these hooks.
> > 
> > Ok, so to be clear, any module which does not directly impose some form
> > of access control is not eligible for an LSM?
> 
> That's exactly the intention, yes.

Ok, thanks.

I thought it was intended to be more general than that - in fact I
specifically thought it was not intended to be purely for single machine
authentication decisions within a single kernel module, but that anything
which would aid in enabling new security features, locally or remotely,
would be game.  (Which - it means nothing - but I would clearly have
preferred :)

Thanks for setting me straight.

-serge

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux