On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:26:57 +0900
Tetsuo Handa <from-lsm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sean wrote:All of a sudden you've implemented the main features of AA with veryDo you agree with passing "struct vfsmount" to VFS helper functions and LSM hooks
few changes to the kernel. It should be more maintainable, and much
easier to get accepted into the kernel.
and introducing d_namespace_path() so that the AA extension can calculate the requested pathname
and map the requested pathname to SELinux's labels?
Frankly i'm not in a position to judge, but if that's the best way to provide
the desired functionality, then it sounds good. But please make sure you
bounce this all off someone who actually knows what they're talking about. ;o)
Really I was just casually following along this ongoing conversation and had
a more conceptual/design question about how things were implemented. A few
people explained how AA labelling at "runtime" wasn't conceptually very
different than what SELinux did. All that begged the question as to why
that functionality couldn't just be tacked on to SELinux?