From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751179AbWDQSCd (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:02:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751104AbWDQSCd (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:02:33 -0400 Received: from web36606.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.23]:40620 "HELO web36606.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751179AbWDQSCd (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:02:33 -0400 Message-ID: <20060417180231.71328.qmail@web36606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-RocketYMMF: rancidfat Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:02:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Casey Schaufler Reply-To: casey@schaufler-ca.com Subject: Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Cc: James Morris , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fireflier-devel@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <20060417173319.GA11506@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Or, better, remove LSM itself ;) > > Seriously that makes a lot of sense. All other > modules people have come up > with over the last years are irrelevant and/or > broken by design. Didn't you mean "Bah!" (waves paw)? I understand the enthusiasm that the SELinux following demonstrates for the technology. I do not appreciate the bashing of alternatives. Casey Schaufler casey@schaufler-ca.com