Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/3] SLIM

From: James Morris (jmorris@private)
Date: Thu Nov 17 2005 - 13:27:10 PST


On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Stephen Smalley wrote:

> We then end up with only one new LSM here (SLIM) and two support
> libraries.  At which point the only motivator for stacker is combining
> SLIM and SELinux without directly coupling them.

I'm not clear on why we'd need SLIM when we have SELinux.

How difficult would it be to implement a LOMAC policy in SELinux?



- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@private>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Nov 17 2005 - 13:28:09 PST