From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750741AbWDSHhE (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:37:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750737AbWDSHhE (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:37:04 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:56454 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750732AbWDSHhC (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:37:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks From: Arjan van de Ven To: Kurt Garloff Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Gerrit Huizenga , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Stephen Smalley , casey@schaufler-ca.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fireflier-devel@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <20060418213833.GC5741@tpkurt.garloff.de> References: <20060417225525.GA17463@infradead.org> <20060418115819.GB8591@infradead.org> <20060418213833.GC5741@tpkurt.garloff.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:36:51 +0200 Message-Id: <1145432211.3085.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Actually, I'm a bit worried about the discussion. > When I chose Linux, it was about the freedom of choice. > And we have a nice abstraction (LSM) that allows this freedom. While I agree with the "freedom" part, I would not call the LSM abstraction "nice". It's not. Part of the reason for that is that there weren't more "real" users, only "ghost" ones, so fixing the interface to fit the users hasn't been done. "removing" LSM seems to be an attempt to fit the interface to all real users at the time. Once there's > 1, the fix can be different ;)