[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1705302021090.31018@namei.org>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 20:22:57 +1000 (AEST)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
cc: keescook@...omium.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
casey@...aufler-ca.com, hch@...radead.org, igor.stoppa@...wei.com,
james.l.morris@...cle.com, paul@...l-moore.com, sds@...ho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LSM: Convert security_hook_heads into explicit array of
struct list_head
On Sun, 28 May 2017, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> can afford enabling". And we know that we cannot merge all security modules
> into mainline. Thus, allowing LKM-based LSM modules is inevitable.
Nope, it's not inevitable. The LSM API only caters to in-tree users.
I'm not sure why you persist against this.
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
