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

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 22:26:24 BST, Alan Cox said:

(Two replies to this paragraph, addressing 2 separate issues....)

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

If we heave the LSM stuff overboard, there's one thing that *will* need
addressing - what to do with kernel support of Posix-y capabilities. Currently
some of the heavy lifting is done by security/commoncap.c.

Frankly, that's *another* thing that we need to either *fix* so it works right,
or rip out of the kernel entirely. As far as I know, there's no in-tree way
to make /usr/bin/ping be set-CAP_NET_RAW and have it DTRT.

Attachment: pgppSs7l2r5pY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Method Design Architecture guidance needed...
    ... >addressing four entirely separate concerns: ... class reflection on it, reduce code volume by 99%, and feel like a ... hero. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: yellow bamboo intensive training report from bali
    ... isometric exercises) have practical, physical benefits. ... have nothing per se to do with the controversial knockdown; I'm addressing ... them here as separate aspects. ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: A Few More Best of Bakaisms
    ... R Brickston wrote: ... this is where I missed whom I was supposed to be addressing. ... I didn't write the paragraph above, but I wrote what's immediately below. ... reader. ...
    (rec.bicycles.misc)