* Casey Schaufler (caseyat_private) wrote: > > No one seems to have voiced an objection to my suggestion > regarding the start of Phase II. That means everyone agrees, > doesn't it? I do not object to looking for ways to add functionality to LSM. Authoritatve hooks certainly fall in this category as far as I'm concerned. As Greg and Stephen mentioned, it's difficult to commit to what Phase II will look like since Phase I + acceptance could change things significantly. I think the prudent direction now is continue refining what we have, wait for 2.5 to open, submit, evaluate criticism, adjust patch, goto submit... After dust settles (assuming we get _something_ accepted ;-) then I'd like to look at what we can do to improve what's in the mainline. This could mean trying to get all the hooks accepted that got turned down...perhaps it could mean working on authoritative/kernel out stuff...I simply don't know. To reiterate, I think authoritative hooks in some fashion, perhaps we can find a more elegant solution as we move forward, could be an LSM improvement. cheers, -chris _______________________________________________ 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 : Thu Nov 08 2001 - 17:27:49 PST