* Luc Pardon <lucpat_private> [010418 01:02]: > An application developer may want to inform the user that (s)he > doesn't have sufficient rights to do something, without actually > attempt to do that "something" and set off all kinds of alarms. While I think I understand the reasoning involved, I know *I* would like to keep Linux as source-compatible with other Unix-like and Unix operating systems as possible. A mess of new syscalls (or one new syscall with a generic interface and many library wrappers) would only encourage non-standard code. Furthermore, I don't know if requiring the module to support such query interfaces is a good idea either -- the policy a module may desire to implement may wish to restrict this sort of information. Requiring the module to support query interfaces would leak this information, going against the module's design policy. Is the added functionality worth encouraging non-standard code and forcing modules to implement this particular piece of policy just to avoid setting off bells that most well-behaved programs won't be setting off? [As usual, feel free to rip my ideas apart. Don't be shy. :] -- Earthlink: The #1 provider of unsolicited bulk email to the Internet. _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Apr 18 2001 - 02:40:50 PDT