From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932302AbWDRUAK (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:00:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932305AbWDRUAK (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:00:10 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:30891 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932302AbWDRUAI (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:00:08 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:59:56 -0500 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" To: Alan Cox Cc: Gerrit Huizenga , Christoph Hellwig , 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 Subject: Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks Message-ID: <20060418195956.GH29302@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> References: <1145386009.21723.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1145386009.21723.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk): > On Maw, 2006-04-18 at 09:50 -0700, Gerrit Huizenga wrote: > > or are there places where a "less than perfect, easy to use, good enough" > > security policy? I believe there is room for both based on the end > > users' needs and desires. But that is just my opinion. > > Poor security systems lead to less security than no security because it > lulls people into a false sense of security. Someone who knows their Not wanting to make any digs one way or another, but because the culture right now refuses to admit it I must point out: So does "security" which is too complicated and therefore ends up misconfigured (or disabled). The posix caps sendmail fiasco is one example. -serge