Re: x86-64 LSM BSD Securelevel module

• Previous message: Stephen Smalley: "Re: LSM stacker update"
• In reply to: Christopher Warner: "Re: x86-64 LSM BSD Securelevel module"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 04:29:26AM -0500, Christopher Warner wrote:
> I'd be remiss not to mention that maybe if the Capability module is
> flagged in kernel config there should be a note about this. The current
> note defaults to telling the user to select "Y" when in doubt. Or at
> least the modules that don't take it upon themselves to load primary
> should grey out. 

Passing capability.disable=1 as an argument to the kernel in your
bootloader will also tell the Capability module to not register with the
kernel and allow the BSDSecurelevel module to load.

-- 
Steve Beattie                               Don't trust programmers?
<steve@private>                         Complete StackGuard distro at
http://NxNW.org/~steve/                            immunix.org
        http://www.sardonix.org -- Audit code, earn respect.

• application/pgp-signature attachment: stored

• Previous message: Stephen Smalley: "Re: LSM stacker update"
• In reply to: Christopher Warner: "Re: x86-64 LSM BSD Securelevel module"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed Feb 02 2005 - 06:28:44 PST