Re: [BK PATCH] LSM changes for 2.5.59

From: David Wagner (dawat_private)
Date: Wed Feb 12 2003 - 14:01:39 PST

  • Next message: David Wagner: "Re: side issues of baloney with that ham...(was LSM changes for 2.5.59)"

    'Christoph Hellwig' wrote:
    >There's no one taking away the LSM patches.
    Are you volunteering to maintain those patches and keep them up to date
    with the mainline kernel, then?
    There's a reason why LSM is needed.  A few other projects tried
    maintaining their own patches, but they largely collapsed under the
    weight of doing so, and they got almost no deployment because of the
    deployment difficulties of maintaining a separate branch in the kernel.
    People have tried doing what you propose.  They failed.
    Keeping separate patches is a costly way to go.  My prediction is that
    it would kill all but the most well-funded security projects.  Maybe some
    would consider that a good thing, but it's a cost we shouldn't ignore.
    linux-security-module mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Feb 12 2003 - 14:26:24 PST