Re: LSM Patch Additions for CAPP (C2) Audit Trails

From: Stephen Smalley (sdsat_private)
Date: Fri Jul 06 2001 - 05:55:00 PDT

  • Next message: Valdis.Kletnieksat_private: "Re: Kernel Security Extensions USENIX BOF Summary"

    On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Crispin Cowan wrote:
    
    > At the same lunch, we briefed Ted on the discussion of how to deal with the
    > "capabilities question": should it be a module or not?  Should we move all
    > kernel security logic out to a module or not?  Ted agreed with the consensus
    > the LSM list came to a few weeks ago:  movking kernel logic out to a module
    > is too intrusive and too risk-prone, so don't do it.
    
    Could you clarify about the capabilities module?  From your description
    above, it sounds like Ted agreed that we shouldn't move the base
    kernel logic out to a module, but it isn't clear if that also
    includes the core capabilities logic.  If Ted indicated that we
    shouldn't move even the core capabilities logic out into a module,
    then we need to revert those changes, because we have already moved
    some of that logic.
    
    --
    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 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 05:57:23 PDT