Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion to static interface)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Alan Cox
Date: Thursday, October 25, 2007 - 3:21 pm

> > There is a ton of evidence both in computing and outside of it which

On the contrary because I know it is not secure I would

a) Insure it
b) Not waste vast amounts of money on a useless expensive lock
c) Make sure the bike looked not worth stealing
d) Take the saddle with me

(or the software versions of that

a) Keep backups
b) Not waste vast amounts of money on bogus security software
c) Keep the system looking uninteresting
d) Encrypt the data)


Yes and its very clear from the things said by politicians that if the
computer software people don't do this soon, the legislators will make
very sure they do by stripping away all the techniques used to hide from
liability for failure.


Absolutely - but those layers should do whatever they do *right* and
really do it, whether they are complex whole system controls like SELinux
or simple network security tools.

Alan
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Linus Torvalds, (Wed Oct 17, 7:18 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Andreas Gruenbacher, (Fri Oct 19, 1:26 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Oct 19, 1:40 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, James Morris, (Fri Oct 19, 2:07 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Jan Engelhardt, (Sat Oct 20, 4:05 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, James Morris, (Sat Oct 20, 3:57 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Adrian Bunk, (Sun Oct 21, 3:59 pm)
Re: Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Crispin Cowan, (Sun Oct 21, 6:12 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Arjan van de Ven, (Mon Oct 22, 9:09 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], James Morris, (Mon Oct 22, 9:56 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Arjan van de Ven, (Mon Oct 22, 9:57 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Chris Wright, (Mon Oct 22, 10:16 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Giacomo Catenazzi, (Mon Oct 22, 10:44 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Jan Engelhardt, (Tue Oct 23, 1:55 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Jan Engelhardt, (Tue Oct 23, 2:10 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Chris Wright, (Tue Oct 23, 2:13 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Jan Engelhardt, (Tue Oct 23, 2:13 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Jan Engelhardt, (Tue Oct 23, 2:14 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Giacomo A. Catenazzi, (Tue Oct 23, 2:14 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Jan Engelhardt, (Tue Oct 23, 2:18 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Serge E. Hallyn, (Tue Oct 23, 8:20 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Jan Engelhardt, (Tue Oct 23, 8:28 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Serge E. Hallyn, (Tue Oct 23, 8:34 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Tue Oct 23, 5:31 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Chris Wright, (Tue Oct 23, 5:32 pm)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface [revert patch], Arjan van de Ven, (Tue Oct 23, 10:06 pm)
Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion ..., Bernd Petrovitsch, (Thu Oct 25, 2:19 am)
Re: LSM conversion to static interface, Valdis.Kletnieks, (Thu Oct 25, 3:23 am)
Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion ..., Arjan van de Ven, (Thu Oct 25, 10:10 am)
Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion ..., Alan Cox, (Thu Oct 25, 3:21 pm)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Stefan Richter, (Sat Oct 27, 10:31 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Stefan Richter, (Sun Oct 28, 2:25 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Tilman Schmidt, (Sun Oct 28, 5:01 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Stefan Richter, (Sun Oct 28, 7:37 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Simon Arlott, (Sun Oct 28, 7:59 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Tilman Schmidt, (Sun Oct 28, 9:55 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Tilman Schmidt, (Sun Oct 28, 11:51 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Adrian Bunk, (Sun Oct 28, 12:25 pm)
Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework, Tilman Schmidt, (Sun Oct 28, 12:42 pm)
Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework, Jan Engelhardt, (Sun Oct 28, 1:46 pm)
Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion ..., Arjan van de Ven, (Sun Oct 28, 10:12 pm)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, Tilman Schmidt, (Mon Oct 29, 5:29 pm)
Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion ..., Bernd Petrovitsch, (Tue Oct 30, 2:41 am)
Re: eradicating out of tree modules, linux-os (Dick Johnson), (Tue Oct 30, 6:11 am)