From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932190AbWDURas (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:30:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751335AbWDURas (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:30:48 -0400 Received: from 216-99-217-87.dsl.aracnet.com ([216.99.217.87]:22912 "EHLO sorel.sous-sol.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751190AbWDURar (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:30:47 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:30:08 -0700 From: Chris Wright To: Stephen Smalley Cc: Chris Wright , Arjan van de Ven , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview Message-ID: <20060421173008.GB3061@sorel.sous-sol.org> References: <20060419174905.29149.67649.sendpatchset@ermintrude.int.wirex.com> <1145470463.3085.86.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145522524.3023.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060420192717.GA3828@sorel.sous-sol.org> <1145621926.21749.29.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1145621926.21749.29.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Stephen Smalley (sds@tycho.nsa.gov) wrote: > Difficult to evaluate, when the answer whenever a flaw is pointed out is > "that's not in our threat model." Easy enough to have a protection > model match the threat model when the threat model is highly limited > (and never really documented anywhere, particularly in a way that might > warn its users of its limitations). I know, there's two questions. Whether the protection model is valid, and whether the threat model is worth considering. So far, I've not seen anything that's compelling enough to show AppArmor fundamentally broken. Ugly and inefficient, yes...broken, not yet. thanks, -chris