RE: Security through Permissiveness: A Zen Riddle? (Crispin Cowan)

From: Matt Block (mattat_private)
Date: Fri Jul 13 2001 - 16:23:26 PDT

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "Re: Security through Permissiveness: A Zen Riddle?"

    -----Original Message-----
    From: crispinat_private [mailto:crispinat_private] 
    
    
    > IMHO, the priority sequence for LSM is:
    
    >  1. Finish the current rendition of LSM and get it into the 2.5 kernel
    (as
    >     Greg said)
    >  2. Audit
    >  3. Permissive hooks
    
    Does your humble opinion represent, by any chance, something that can be
    viewed
    as a guideline?  If you are saying that permissive hooks are low
    priority, but
    that they _are_ a recognized goal of the project, then I think I agree;
    there
    may be no need to get them in now, but perhaps something _could_ be put
    in at
    relatively low cost so as to indicate more clearly that this is a
    direction in
    which we think we might want to go.  Even just a very low priority entry
    on the
    TODO list would be a great start.
    
    > In any case, I feel much more strongly that "finish stage 1" is high
    priority
    > than I do about disputing which of audit or permissiveness is more
    important. 
    > So lets go finish stage 1, and then worry about the other stuff.
    
    "I'd love to help, but I'm not much use at anything but a supervisory
    position.
    You boys just keep working on that fence, and I'll sit back over here
    and
    critique.  You know, only the BEST white-washers get to paint that
    fence."
    
    Is there a clear list of projects on which help is needed?
    
      -- Matt
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 - 16:24:23 PDT