Re: New stacker performance results

From: Casey Schaufler (casey@schaufler-ca.com)
Date: Wed May 25 2005 - 09:23:45 PDT


--- James Morris <jmorris@private> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2005, Stephen Smalley wrote:

> In fact, there has recently been some discussion
> about removing LSM
> completely and just using SELinux directly.

In the Unix Era we made our share of mistakes,
especially with add on module interfaces and
extreme security implementations. STREAMS modules
and Information labels come to mind as prime
examples. I can think of no instance where the
two types of facilities were combined into the
same blunder.

SELinux is a poor choice for a general framework.
While Type Enforcement may be used to implement
many interesting policies it is far from universal.
SELinux is not a lightweight implementation, and
would be overkill if all you wanted was a minor 
policy such as time-of-day access restrictions.
SELinux associates rights and privileges with
programs, a paradighm that has it's detractors.
But the most important problem that I see from
here is that nowhere is there a complete and
accurate description of how, *in general* one
would go about creating an arbitrary and
complete policy using SELinux.



Casey Schaufler
casey@schaufler-ca.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed May 25 2005 - 09:24:24 PDT