On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 10:34:30PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieksat_private wrote: > We recently had a rework of the LSM code such that it added zero executable > unless you asked for LSM in the .config. Would Linus be more receptive > if audit was similarly implemented? Performance isn't everything. I've heard a bit of reluctance on the part of kernel maintainers for the existing LSM hooks; adding dozens of new hooks for auditing purposes is a significant amount of new source, even if none of it ever makes it to the standard user's compiled kernel. (To directly answer your question: I think the only way Linus would ever consider adding auditing callbacks would be if they made no binary size or performance penalties except for those interested in paying the price.) -- "As we all know by now, the republicans won control of congress, and as someone who requires a steady flow of rage to make his living, I couldn't be happier." -- Lewis Black
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jan 29 2003 - 21:36:28 PST