Greg KH wrote: >On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 07:26:09PM -0800, Crispin Cowan wrote: > >>We hope to do some work to come up with a syscal implementation >>that is more acceptable to the kernel community. We don't have anything >>yet, and we won't bother proposing until and unless we come up with >>something that will pass muster with Miller's issues, but it would >>really nice if the syscall number stuck around. >> >> >Who is "we"? > WireX Research, and anyone else who wants to play. It's really OS research, and so not worth pestering Linus or the LSM community about until we have some results. >And why would it matter if the number suck around? What's wrong with >using a new one if it's found to be really needed in the future? > I suppose the syscall number doesn't really matter that much, it would just be convenient. Crispin -- Crispin Cowan, Ph.D. Chief Scientist, WireX http://wirex.com/~crispin/ Security Hardened Linux Distribution: http://immunix.org Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html Just say ".Nyet"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 21:25:33 PST