On Sat, 9 Jun 2007, Sean wrote:

quoted text
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:26:57 +0900
> Tetsuo Handa <from-lsm@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> wrote:
>
>> Sean wrote:
>>> All of a sudden you've implemented the main features of AA with very
>>> few changes to the kernel.  It should be more maintainable, and much
>>> easier to get accepted into the kernel.
>> Do you agree with passing "struct vfsmount" to VFS helper functions and LSM hooks
>> and introducing d_namespace_path() so that the AA extension can calculate the requested pathname
>> and map the requested pathname to SELinux's labels?
>>
>
> Frankly i'm not in a position to judge, but if that's the best way to provide
> the desired functionality, then it sounds good.  But please make sure you
> bounce this all off someone who actually knows what they're talking about. ;o)
> Really I was just casually following along this ongoing conversation and had
> a more conceptual/design question about how things were implemented.  A few
> people explained how AA labelling at "runtime" wasn't conceptually very
> different than what SELinux did.  All that begged the question as to why
> that functionality couldn't just be tacked on to SELinux?

Sean,
   since you aren't in a position to judge what's acceptable and I'm not in 
a position to change code our exchange is pointless.

I apologize to the list for the excessive messasges.

David Lang
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/