On Thu, 31 May 2001, Chris Wright wrote: > I totally agree that this should be consistent. The problem is that > capabilities is fundamentally about overriding restrictions (at least that's > my read of the P1003.1e draft). Perhaps the changes to capable() calls > should be reverted, and the hooks (like setnice()) should be placed apart > from other authorization criteria to give the module authoritative control. My vote is for this approach. -- Stephen D. Smalley, NAI Labs ssmalleyat_private _______________________________________________ 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 Jun 04 2001 - 11:18:24 PDT