Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Replace security fields with hashtable

From: Valdis.Kletnieks@private
Date: Thu Oct 28 2004 - 06:53:56 PDT

Previous message: Hemal: "Problem while compiling a module for LSM"
In reply to: Colin Walters: "Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Replace security fields with hashtable"
Next in thread: Stephen Smalley: "Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Replace security fields with hashtable"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 18:29:40 EDT, Colin Walters said:

> > So I think it makes sense to have stronger DAC protections in addition
> > to MAC, even if they cannot guarantee complete protection.
> 
> That's true, I guess it is useful if you still want them to be able to
> share files etc (which full_user_role currently prevents without
> additional work).

Anybody already looked at what work that would entail?  I'm likely stuck
in a position where I need either the added DAC or extend the full_user_role
stuff....

application/pgp-signature attachment: stored

Previous message: Hemal: "Problem while compiling a module for LSM"
In reply to: Colin Walters: "Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Replace security fields with hashtable"
Next in thread: Stephen Smalley: "Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Replace security fields with hashtable"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Oct 28 2004 - 06:54:38 PDT