Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <casey@...>
Cc: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@...>, <linux-security-module@...>, LKML Kernel <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Sunday, August 12, 2007 - 7:18 pm

Casey Schaufler wrote:
It isn't even an exclusive decision: both design points can be "right",
but aimed at different use cases. Which is why LSM exists, so users can
decide on an appropriate mechanism.

Crispin

-- 
Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.               http://crispincowan.com/~crispin/
Director of Software Engineering   http://novell.com
	AppArmor Chat: irc.oftc.net/#apparmor

-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Casey Schaufler, (Sat Aug 11, 1:57 pm)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Casey Schaufler, (Mon Aug 13, 12:23 am)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Casey Schaufler, (Fri Aug 17, 12:56 am)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Casey Schaufler, (Mon Aug 20, 10:29 am)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Casey Schaufler, (Tue Aug 21, 11:35 am)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Casey Schaufler, (Tue Aug 21, 11:50 am)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Casey Schaufler, (Wed Aug 22, 12:08 am)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Crispin Cowan, (Sun Aug 12, 7:18 pm)
Re: [PATCH] Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel, Arjan van de Ven, (Sat Aug 11, 3:12 pm)