|From:||Crispin Cowan <crispin-AT-novell.com>|
|To:||Alan Cox <alan-AT-lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>|
|Subject:||Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks|
|Date:||Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:00:46 -0700|
|Cc:||Gerrit Huizenga <gh-AT-us.ibm.com>, James Morris <jmorris-AT-namei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue-AT-us.ibm.com>, Stephen Smalley <sds-AT-tycho.nsa.gov>, casey-AT-schaufler-ca.com, linux-security-module-AT-vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, fireflier-devel-AT-lists.sourceforge.net, chrisw-AT-sous-sol.org|
Alan Cox wrote: > On Llu, 2006-04-17 at 15:15 -0700, Gerrit Huizenga wrote: > >> something like AppArmour provides a much simpler security model for >> > If the AppArmour people care to submit their code upstream and get it > merged then that would be a reason to keep LSM, if they don't then LSM > (if they even want it..) can just become part of their patchkit instead. > Indeed, this thread is timely. We (SUSE) opensourced the user-level AppArmor http://www.opensuse.org/AppArmor tools in January 2006 http://www.securityfocus.com/brief/103 and http://lwn.net/Articles/166975/ and the kernel module has always been open source. We have been hard at work on making the code as CodingStyle-compliant as we can since then, with the intent of submitting it for inclusion in the kernel. We actually planned to submit it later this week, but in light of this thread, we cut a few corners and expect to post our first proposed patches here by about Wednesday. Crispin -- Crispin Cowan, Ph.D. http://crispincowan.com/~crispin/ Director of Software Engineering, Novell http://novell.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to email@example.com More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Copyright © 2006, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds