On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 04:09:08PM -0400, Matt Block wrote: > > I'm betraying a certain naivete as regards the kernel political process, > I'm sure, but I would like to see as eventual goals of this project the > ability for an _administrator_ (not a module creator or kernel hacker) > to implement policy on his system by integrating (potentially several) > modules, each one capturing some portion of the intended policy; the > ability for an administrator to use security modules from (potentially) > many different sources _at the same time_; the ability for an > administrator to use particular modules at different points (read: the > ability to gracefully load and unload modules without effecting other > modules). These goals point to an expanded effort along the lines of > JMJs chaining, but also to an abundance of hooks admitting of > permissiveness as well as restriction. No, the goals of this project are to simply get the needed hooks into the kernel to allow others to build modules to do all of what you described. It's up to the individual module creators to work together in the way you mention to achieve the goals you wish to see. It's not the goal of this project to do that, but only to give them the ability to do that in the future. Did that make sense? thanks, 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 : Fri Jul 13 2001 - 13:23:24 PDT