On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:34:48 -0700
John Johansen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 07:37:21AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:40:24 -0700
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > before going into the LSM / security side of things, I'd like to get
> > the VFS guys to look at your VFS interaction code.
> >
> yes, the vfs interaction definitely need their review.
>
> > In addition, I'd like to ask you to put a file in Documentation/
> > somewhere that describes what AppArmor is intended security
> > protection is (it's different from SELinux for sure for example);
> > by having such a document for each LSM user, end users and distros
> > can make a more informed decision which module suits their
> > requirements... and it also makes it possible to look at the
> > implementation to see if it has gaps to the intent, without getting
> > into a pissing contest about which security model is better; but
> > unless the security goals are explicitly described that's a trap
> > that will keep coming back... so please spend some time on getting
> > a good description going here..
> >
> yes this is needed and a good idea in general
>
would you mind posting your first stab at this to the list shortly,
because without that it's nearly impossible to review your patchkit in
a sensible way...
-
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]
