Re: [patch 5/12] lsm stacking v0.2: actual stacker module

[Tony Jones <tonyj@suse.de>]

On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 02:53:17PM -0400, James Morris wrote:

> It might be worth thinking about a more general securityfs as part of LSM,
> to be used by stacker and LSM modules.  SELinux could use this instead of
> managing its own selinuxfs.

Good idea.   In the case of stacked modules each with a custom fs, having them
be part of a common hierarchy makes a lot of sense.

I'm assuming you are advocating for adding LSM support to provide some level 
of consistency in presentation rather than it _just_ being a new mount point
for every module to live under?

Take the discussion to the LSM list?

Thanks!

Tony
-
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/