lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:02:47 -0700 From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, David Safford <safford@...son.ibm.com>, Serge Hallyn <serue@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM) On Fri, 2008-10-31 at 15:35 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > Is this even useful for filesystems like proc or sysfs? Should we bloat > > those inodes for a feature which might not possibly apply there? > > Currently, we're not measuring proc or sysfs files. So, one of the points is that this "bloats" 'struct inode' for at least these two filesystems. It has no use there, so it does not help much to stick it in a common structure that those use. -- Dave -- 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