Re: Possible system call interface for LSM

From: jmjonesat_private
Date: Fri Aug 10 2001 - 13:55:29 PDT

  • Next message: richard offer: "Re: Possible system call interface for LSM"

    On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Greg KH wrote:
    
    > I haven't seen any point so far that shows a legitimate need.
    > Everything I've seen talks about stacking modules.  Hence the current
    > version in the tree.  But have I missed anything?
    > 
    
    Other than the convenience factor of it being a universal channel to pass
    information between the application and the module (expectation/identity)
    and to prevent whoopsies by enumerating the flavor of the arguments, I 
    don't see any need for it.  My stacking arguments are driven by the
    difficulties it raises and how they might be addressed, not the solutions
    it offers.
    
    I've learned to "speak up quickly" when things like this get presented in
    patches... grass doesn't grow under this project's feet. :)
    
    There are other ways for the application to identify the module that are 
    more common, although less speedy.
      
    > thanks,
    > 
    > greg k-h
    > 
    
    J. Melvin Jones
    
    |>------------------------------------------------------
    ||  J. MELVIN JONES            jmjonesat_private 
    |>------------------------------------------------------
    ||  Microcomputer Systems Consultant  
    ||  Software Developer
    ||  Web Site Design, Hosting, and Administration
    ||  Network and Systems Administration
    |>------------------------------------------------------
    ||  http://www.jmjones.com/
    |>------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 Aug 10 2001 - 13:56:34 PDT