Re: Clarifications of LSM API

From: James Morris (jmorris@private)
Date: Tue Jun 29 2004 - 08:49:36 PDT

  • Next message: Stephen Smalley: "Re: Clarifications of LSM API"

    On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Stephen Smalley wrote:
    
    > Specifically, I had suggested embedding the common header, see:
    > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-security-module&m=99980953709764&w=2
    > and
    > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-security-module&m=99986372711363&w=2
    
    The optimization for a single LSM is good, but won't the common case be
    two LSMs (e.g. capabilities + something else) ?  If so, I'd suggest having
    two statically allocated entries as primary & secondary, then any further
    LSMs can be stacked dynamically.  Even then, unless a distro was planning
    on shipping three or more stacked LSMs by default, I'd wonder if it was
    really going to be useful in a wider sense.
    
    
    - James
    -- 
    James Morris
    <jmorris@private>
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jun 29 2004 - 08:50:09 PDT