Re: [RFC][Patch 0/3] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM) and provider

Hi!

> This is a request for comments for a subset of the original integrity
> patches. By submitting this subset of the original patches, we hope to
> simplify its review and ultimately ease its inclusion into the kernel.

We still don't know what these are good for...

...preventing user from taking out hdd and modifying binaries?

...if user can do that, why is he unable to remove the lim.ko, too?

TPM?

Why this won't be abused to prevent me from playing with hardware I
own?

							Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [RFC][Patch 0/3] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM) and provider
    • From: Mimi Zohar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.22-rc6 spurious hangs
• Next by Date: Re: [linux-lvm] 2.6.22-rc4 XFS fails after hibernate/resume
• Previous by thread: [RFC][Patch 0/3] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM) and provider
• Next by thread: [RFC][PATCH 1/3]integrity: API, hooks, placement and dummy provider
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]