On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 04:40:43PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > We have successfully refutted the arguements that restrictive > > hooks coupled with whacked capabilities is sufficient. No > > one has proposed a resolution for the MAC/DAC ordering issue > > which does not involve authoritative hooks. You assert that > > restrictive hooks will be easier to sell than authoritative > > even though they are known to be insufficent for POSIX ACLs > > and NFSv4. > > The MAC/DAC ordering seems to be resolved (i.e. WireX hasn't complained, > and they were the only ones that seemed to mind in the first place.) Totally outside the specifics of this hook... WHEN?!?! Please respond with references to the the appropriate posts to this list that "decided" that. Personally, I'd like to review them. You may be right, but some of us missed those references. 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 Oct 05 2001 - 17:06:32 PDT