>Right. And I'm saying that *THIS* is the time to at least think about >defining a new, secure interface. Good. I, too, would be truly interested to hear of a solution, if you find one. By all means, I hope you will study the problem and try out experimental solutions in your module. But, in the meantime, I plead: don't mandate it on the rest of us module-writers. Remember that the general kernel patches are intended to be mainstream, proven, non-research code. All the experimental, research-y policy stuff should go in the policy modules, according to my interpetation of Linus's mandate for this project, and at the moment, this new interface surely must belong in that category. In other words, research on a new, secure interface appears to be outside the scope of this mailing list, under my interpretation of its charter. Providing suggestions of security_ops hooks that would be required to support such an interface, on the other hand, appears to be directly in line with the goals of the list, if I can presume to try to guess what the list owners would say. _______________________________________________ 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 : Mon Apr 23 2001 - 20:31:49 PDT