Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 11:47 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
If SELinux was transparently working (Which it doesn't on Fedora on many
situations), nobody would name it "infection".
Pretty much every security solution has had a history of such problems.
Well, then better acknowledge these facts and stop reiterating RH's
marketing slogans.
I have never disagreed that there are problems and you need to stop the
usual adhominem attacks to maintain a rational discussion.
If SELinux was such an "terrific and compelling approach", upstream
Linux and other distros would have adopted it _years ago_ with standing
ovations - Fact is: Nobody did.
Note that contrary to your claims upstream has adopted it even before
the first 2.6 kernel release and many other distributions are in-fact
adopting it as you have agreed with the example of Debian earlier in
this thread. Popularity doesn't determine the best choices. Otherwise we
would be all running Windows now.
Rahul
