Re: Time to remove LSM (was Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks)

On Llu, 2006-04-17 at 12:51 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
I agree about the BSD secure levels code, it has a known reported
security problem, with no response by its maintainers. On that aspect
alone, it should be removed.

You can implement a BSD securelevel model in SELinux as far as I can see
from looking at it, and do it better than the code today, so its not
really a feature drop anyway just a migration away from some fossils

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SElinux ?
    ... if you have problems with boot menus then best leave SELinux ... Does leaving it alone mean leaving it off or leaving it on? ... necessarily an archive restore, was to disable SElinux which worked for me. ...
    (uk.comp.os.linux)
  • Re: 2.6.0-test9: selinux compile error with "make O=..."
    ... > Known problem that has been reported back to the maintainers about ... This was discussed when SELinux was originally submitted for merging, ... but these header files are private to the SELinux kernel module are ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: SElinux ?
    ... Hmm, if you have problems with boot menus then best leave SELinux ... alone, it does need quite a lot of in-depth knowledge ...
    (uk.comp.os.linux)
  • Re: Kernel 2.6.12-1.1387 hang up at "setting up hostname"
    ... you are not alone with it. ... Rudolf Kastl ... occurs disabling selinux is not a good advice in my eyes... ...
    (Fedora)