linux-kernel - Re: [AppArmor #7 0/13] AppArmor security module

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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100826070145.GA11959@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Thu, 26 Aug 2010 09:01:45 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc:	John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [AppArmor #7 0/13] AppArmor security module

On Thu 2010-08-05 20:27:24, James Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> > > Note that I added the patch below to update AA against the latest 
> > > version of path_truncate:
> > 
> > Ok, so now we have two name-based "security" modules. Can we at least
> > drop TOMOYO? That seems to have all apparmor disadvantages plus some
> > more...
> 
> No.  The policy is that any security module which implements an access 
> control scheme and meets a well-defined security goal, and passes 
> technical review, may be merged.
> 
> aka, The Arjan Protocol:
> 
> http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Documenting_Security_Module_Intent

It seems that security subsystem has lower standards than rest of the
kernel. Sad.
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/