Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
SELinux and AppArmor
Posted Oct 17, 2009 3:19 UTC (Sat) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
however when that becomes 'it doesn't handle this case that SELinux does, so it must be worthless', that stops being valid technical criticism, and the objections have frequently gotten to that stage (and, no, my memory is not good enough to remember exactly who made which objections)
Posted Oct 17, 2009 3:44 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
It is ok for a security solution to address a specific subset of the problems while leaving others as outside the scope but the documentation should explicitly say so. If it doesn't then it makes it harder to merge those patches. Smack did a good job of describing the scope of the problem it was trying to address.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds