Re: [PATCH] no longer export capability_ops and nproc_ops

Previous message: jmjonesat_private: "Re: [PATCH] no longer export capability_ops and nproc_ops"
In reply to: jmjonesat_private: "Re: [PATCH] no longer export capability_ops and nproc_ops"
Next in thread: jmjonesat_private: "Re: [PATCH] no longer export capability_ops and nproc_ops"
Reply: jmjonesat_private: "Re: [PATCH] no longer export capability_ops and nproc_ops"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

chrisat_private

* jmjonesat_private (jmjonesat_private) wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Chris Wright wrote:
> 
> > Is anyone still using the capabilty_ops directly instead of stacking
> > with capability module?
> > 
> > I don't think we need to export capability_ops and nproc_ops any longer.
> > 
> > Thoughts/flames?
> > 
> > -chris
> 
> 
> I use capability_plug.o to stack in my prototype.  Direct access is not
> within the LSM paradigm, I think.  How does not-exporting this advantage
> LSM, specifically?

it forces you to stack properly.  the export is leftover from before we
handled any stacking, so it's legacy cruft.

-chris

_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module