On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 11:08 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> --- Stephen Smalley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > True, but a system that disables proc is likely a
> > system with a custom
> > policy anyway, and dependency on proc is fairly
> > basic to selinux these
> > days (due to reliance on /proc/self/attr for process
> > attribute
> > manipulation in place of the old selinux syscalls).
> > Possibly we should
> > just make selinux depend on proc and drop the #ifdef
> > there.
>
> Alternativly you could move the SELinux specific
> bits out of /proc/self/attr into an equivalent
> /selinux/self/attr and avoid that /proc dependency.
We could, but I don't see any compelling reason to do so. We were
specifically told to use proc for the selinux process attributes when we
refactored the selinux api for 2.6 inclusion, as they are per-process
state and fit naturally into proc.
--
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency
-
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]
