[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071025024131.6082e4a8@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:41:31 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: "Ray Lee" <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>
Cc: "Chris Wright" <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
"Casey Schaufler" <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
"Adrian Bunk" <bunk@...nel.org>,
"Simon Arlott" <simon@...e.lp0.eu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
"Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Andreas Gruenbacher" <agruen@...e.de>,
"Thomas Fricaccia" <thomas_fricacci@...oo.com>,
"Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@...p.org>,
"James Morris" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Crispin Cowan" <crispin@...spincowan.com>,
"Giacomo Catenazzi" <cate@...ian.org>
Subject: Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion to
static interface)
> The idea that poor security is worse than no security is fallacious,
> and not backed up by common experience.
There is a ton of evidence both in computing and outside of it which
shows that poor security can be very much worse than no security at all.
In particular stuff which makes users think they are secure but is
worthless is very dangerous indeed.
When you know that security is limited you act appropriately, when you
believe security is good but it is not you take inappropriate risks and
get badly burned.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists