| |||||||||||||
Linux security non-modules and AppArmorLinux security non-modules and AppArmorPosted Jun 28, 2007 19:56 UTC (Thu) by i3839 (guest, #31386)In reply to: Linux security non-modules and AppArmor by arjan Parent article: Linux security non-modules and AppArmor
What about replacing those indirect function pointer calls with that strange new "alernative" thing, patching the right call in when needed?
Sure, it's ugly, but if it's a real performance problem, then why not? Would mean that having LSM enabled without running any security module wouldn't cost anything either. Of course it isn't needed when LSM goes away, just an idea for when it isn't.
(Log in to post comments)
Linux security non-modules and AppArmor Posted Jun 29, 2007 5:00 UTC (Fri) by arjan (subscriber, #36785) [Link] yes; the proposed patch is a good step in making that actually practical...
|
|||||||||||||