Re: Names vs. Inodes

From: Crispin Cowan (crispinat_private)
Date: Mon Jul 23 2001 - 16:28:36 PDT

  • Next message: Crispin Cowan: "Re: Names vs. Inodes"

    jmjonesat_private wrote:
    
    > MY attempt is to discuss various strategies and how they're supported...
    > or unsupported, in the LSM interface... not to specifically argue against
    > any strategy, just to argue that it implies other strategies that might
    > also be relevant.
    
    We all understand that excluding permissive hooks excludes certain defensive
    strategies. An explicit decision has been made to exclude those hooks and those
    strategies anyway for phase 1.  This decision was made advisedly, aware of both
    the costs (precluded strategies such as honeypots) and benefits (simple assurance
    property, easier acceptance in the mainline kernel) and with a compromise built in
    (support for the Capabilities hooks).
    
    There is no need to keep reminding us :-)
    
    Crispin
    
    --
    Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com
    Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
    Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 Jul 23 2001 - 22:42:18 PDT