Re: A Comment from User Space

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Tue Apr 24 2001 - 14:09:22 PDT

  • Next message: Jesse Pollard: "Re: A Comment from User Space"

    On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:56:46PM -0700, Seth Arnold wrote:
    > Or would it be best to let the whole idea of multiplexed security
    > modules lie until this single-module version is finished?
    
    Yes, let's not bring it up anymore :)
    
    > (I know I keep bringing it up, but there is method to my madness. If I
    > recall, richard at sgi wants the current security checks hookable (i.e.,
    > the standard unix-like permission checking), the first 'planned' module
    > seems to be (by consensus) the posix capabilities, and we all have our
    > favorite 'third-party' module we want to use. That is three modules
    > right there. Sure, few applications use posix capabilities, and it is
    > unlikely the standard unix-like permissions will only be available in
    > module form (for the folks who want speed) -- but I easily see the need
    > for two modules loaded at once. :)
    
    Capabilities will be able to be hooked.  That's a given.  It's up to the
    specific security module to hook them if they want to.  So SubDomain
    will also hook into Capabilities.  All the hooking logic goes into
    SubDomain (burden that it wants to do it.)  This keeps the 99% of the
    world happy that only wants Capabilities and not the overhead of a
    hooking manager type interface.
    
    greg k-h
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Tue Apr 24 2001 - 14:11:05 PDT