Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview

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

 



* Arjan van de Ven ([email protected]) wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 00:32 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> writes:
> > > 
> > > you must have a good defense against that argument, so I'm curious to
> > > hear what it is
> > 
> > [I'm not from the apparmor people but my understanding is]
> > 
> > Usually they claimed name spaces as the reason it couldn't work.
> 
> I actually posted a list of 10 things that I made up in 3 minutes; just
> going over those 10 would be a good start already since they're the most
> obvious ones..

Yes, the conversation is all over the place.  Many of the issues are
about some of the uglier parts of the AppArmor code, but the critical
issue is simple.  Does their protection model actually protect against
their threat model.  I would really like to see some grounded examples
that show whether it's broken or not.

thanks,
-chris
-
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