Re: [BK PATCH] LSM changes for 2.5.59

From: Chris Wright (chrisat_private)
Date: Thu Feb 13 2003 - 03:08:32 PST

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "Re: LSM vs System-call hook"

    * Christoph Hellwig (hchat_private) wrote:
    > 
    > And that for examples is a very important and needed change.  Security
    > modules as loadable modules are a bad idea as you don't have a consistand
    > labelling state - just look at the older selinux versions with all the
    > precondition mess.  But it should be generalized to a new initcall level
    > instead of the current explicit call to the selinux routine..
    
    I wrote such a patch last summer.  I'll rebase it to current and post it
    (most likely when i return from .se).  It needs to be separte from
    normal initcalls since they all happen too late.
    -chris
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Thu Feb 13 2003 - 03:10:53 PST