Re: The Demise of Simple Assurance?

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Tue Jul 31 2001 - 14:01:33 PDT

  • Next message: Valdis.Kletnieksat_private: "Re: The Demise of Simple Assurance?"

    On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 01:46:01PM -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote:
    >    * Shrug.  Ok, so the simple assurance property is not as simple as we would
    >      like.  Tough noogies :-)  We still get a measure of bug tolerance from the
    >      strictly restrictive nature of the LSM interface.
    
    I like this one.  If you are messing around with a security module, the
    framework does its simple best to keep you from doing stupid things, but
    you are still able to do bad things very easily.
    
    Just like the rest of kernel development :)
    
    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 : Tue Jul 31 2001 - 14:04:22 PDT