* Serge E. Hallyn (hallynat_private) wrote: > > Why not just add these things to /proc? As we have to do permission checking > > for /proc anyway it makes sense to me to have it all in the one place. > > Or perhaps an LSM pseudo-fs, allowing modules to register read and write > handlers with an inode under the LSM pseudofs tree? Yes, or just simply hooking into sysfs in 2.5. I agree it seems like a waste of time for each project to reinvent the wheel. It's a question of potential code reuse. thanks, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net _______________________________________________ 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 : Mon Feb 03 2003 - 12:48:56 PST