From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750704AbWDSLlO (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:41:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750705AbWDSLlO (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:41:14 -0400 Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.143]:60126 "EHLO e3.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750704AbWDSLlN (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:41:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:41:06 -0500 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: Kyle Moffett , casey@schaufler-ca.com, James Morris , 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: <20060419114106.GC20481@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> References: <20060419014857.35628.qmail@web36606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200604190656.k3J6uSGW010288@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200604190656.k3J6uSGW010288@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu): > On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:40:25 EDT, Kyle Moffett said: > > Perhaps the SELinux model should be extended to handle (dir-inode, > > path-entry) pairs. For example, if I want to protect the /etc/shadow > > file regardless of what tool is used to safely modify it, I would set > > Some of us think that the tools can protect /etc/shadow just fine on their > own, and are concerned with rogue software that abuses /etc/shadow without > bothering to safely modify it.. Can you rephrase this? I'm don't understand what you're saying... My default response would have to be: > own, and are concerned with rogue software that abuses /etc/shadow without > bothering to safely modify it.. rogue software like vi? thanks, -serge