From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262244AbVAEFW5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:22:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262247AbVAEFW5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:22:57 -0500 Received: from clock-tower.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:60600 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262244AbVAEFWz (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:22:55 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM From: Alan Cox To: Andreas Steinmetz Cc: Lee Revell , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , "Jack O'Quin" In-Reply-To: <41DB4476.8080400@domdv.de> References: <1104374603.9732.32.camel@krustophenia.net> <20050103140359.GA19976@infradead.org> <1104862614.8255.1.camel@krustophenia.net> <20050104182010.GA15254@infradead.org> <1104865034.8346.4.camel@krustophenia.net> <41DB4476.8080400@domdv.de> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1104898693.24187.162.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 04:18:15 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mer, 2005-01-05 at 01:35, Andreas Steinmetz wrote: > Let me remind you all that according to lkml history hch has always been > biased and objecting to anything related to lsm. Nobody can take hch's > opinion here as objective. I would even go so far that when things are > related to lsm(s) he's just tro... Oh I don't think so. Everyone thinks Christoph has it in for their project (me included quite often). He's just blessed with a lot of taste and determination to enforce it, and cursed (or perhaps blessed) with the ability to explain bluntly and clearly his opinion. gid hacks are not a good long term plan. Can we use capabilities, if not - why not and how do we fix it so we can do the job right. Do we need some more capability bits that are implicitly inherited and not touched by setuidness ?