Re: [AppArmor #7 0/13] AppArmor security module
From: Jan III Sobieski
Date: Thu Aug 05 2010 - 05:58:55 EST
2010/8/5 Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>:
> On Fri 2010-07-30 09:05:23, James Morris wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, John Johansen wrote:
>> > This is the seveth general posting of the newest version of the
>> > AppArmor security module it has been rewritten to use the security_path
>> > hooks instead of the previous vfs approach. The current implementation
>> > is aimed at being as semantically close to previous versions of AppArmor
>> > as possible while using the existing LSM infrastructure.
>> Applied to
>> Please carry out any further development against the above tree.
>> 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
Great idea! I suggest also to throw away the unnecessary filesystems.
Ext3 is great - who needs Ext4 or XFS?
Jan III Sobieski
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/