Re: Reasons for Inclusion

From: jmjonesat_private
Date: Fri Mar 22 2002 - 14:03:06 PST

  • Next message: Russell Coker: "Re: Reasons for Inclusion"

    On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, Crispin Cowan wrote:
    
    > jmjonesat_private wrote:
    > 
    > >1) you've met every condition in Linus' original requirement (included the
    > >imbedded systems comment), 100% and without question.
    > >
    
    > Linus made a back-of-the-napkin scale proposal, and now we are (roughly) 
    > 5000 man-hours into development. We know a lot more now than we did last 
    > march, and so assuredly have done some things differntly than Linus 
    > imagined we would. Whether these deviations are acceptable to him is 
    > something we will learn when we present the work.
    
    Yes, and he will want (and the LD's will want) more information than "we
    think we did this right."  I can (and have, honestly (embarrassed-giggle))
    spent 5000 or 1,000,000 hours doing something that is "wrong."  That's a
    fear here, but I don't think it's unarguable that LSM is a good
    solution... I'd just like to "pre-argue" some of the merits.
    
    > 
    > >2) you're not willing to actually sell the patch on it's merits, beyond 
    > >the assertion that it "meets a (differingly interprettable) statement by
    > >Linus"?
    > >
    > Hardly. We're just not willing to have that debate *again* here in this 
    > forum. It is redundant. The next interesting form of this debate will be 
    > when LSM meets the non-LSM people who need to accept it. But discussing 
    > again here is just incestuous intellectual wanking :-)
    
    No, it's not redundant.  This forum has made decisions, and many of them
    have either been argued or defaulted.  We have a product, based on all
    those decisions.  You're saying that self-evaluation is not valuable.  
    We all set out to do things, but sometimes we deflect and diverge... this
    discussion is *critical* to getting LSM accepted, IMHO.
    
    > 
    > >Is Linux really that "ingrown", that two people make all the decisions?  I
    > >don't know Alan, but I would never believe that of Linus.
    > >
    > Linux's development process is hierarchical. Linus gets the final say of 
    > what goes into Linus' source tree, but he is influenced by the opinions 
    > of trusted associates, e.g. Alan Cox. This is not "ingrown."
    > 
    
    Yes, and you believe "we have the top 1 or 2 levels" so everybody else
    will have to argue against from a position of impotence?  Maybe.
    
    > >Or, can nobody write a paper that proves the merit?
    > >
    > A paper is the wrong format to make this case. We have written a paper 
    > to document the LSM design, but it is likely to be peripheral to the 
    > upcoming debate.
    > 
    
    Well, what's the right format?
    
    > >Gonna be a tough fight,
    > >If that's the case,
    > >
    > We know, but this discussion is not helping, just distracting.
    
    No.  You're creating a product... a product that will have to be accepted
    by a group larger than those creating it.  You're near the end, I think,
    so a little "what if they say" is useful, now, for practice and/or
    self-evaluation.  Is that not true?
    
    > 
    > Crispin
    > 
    > -- 
    > Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    > Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com
    > Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
    > Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
    > 
    > 
    
    Fear of Evaluation is a Suspicious Attribute,
    Sincerely,
    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 Mar 22 2002 - 14:05:59 PST