Stephen, Thanks for your comments. I am working on the tone and information in the content and will send it out when it seems reasonable. On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, Stephen Smalley wrote: > I don't see any reason to not add such information to lsm.tmpl. Just FYI, > we are currently writing documentation for the SELinux security module, > and it discusses how SELinux dealt with many of these issues, so it may be > a helpful resource when it is ready for release. This is great and I expect it to be a resource that module writers will want to use, but I'd like for them not to have to read SELinux documentation to get the info they need to develop modules. Are you planning on putting some of that content into the LSM document? If so, I will wait for that, but if not, I'd like to go ahead and get some basic information about module writing into the LSM document. Do you think that adding an even more basic paragraph (for example, one that indicates that module writers should look at capability_plug and dummy_plug as examples and that the modules must implement each hook specified in security.h) would be insultingly trivial or would be valuable as pointing to how to get started? Thanks, Emily -- Emily Ratliff IBM Linux Technology Center, Security _______________________________________________ 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 26 2001 - 12:41:29 PDT