From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932067AbXCHRRm (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:17:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932074AbXCHRRl (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:17:41 -0500 Received: from 216-99-217-87.dsl.aracnet.com ([216.99.217.87]:58161 "EHLO sous-sol.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932067AbXCHRRk (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:17:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:17:52 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: Chris Wright , Mimi Zohar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, safford@watson.ibm.com, serue@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kjhall@linux.vnet.ibm.com, zohar@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch 1/6] integrity: new hooks Message-ID: <20070308171752.GN6602@sequoia.sous-sol.org> References: <1173369800.5981.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070308163118.GK6602@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <20070308170001.GA17304@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070308170001.GA17304@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Serge E. Hallyn (serue@us.ibm.com) wrote: > It's unfortunate, agreed, but > use of LSM as an integrity framework was also a no-go. > > Options? There's too much dup because stuff like above is just access control not integrity measurement. Need to break off the parts that really are different. But I don't have a great option offhand, I recognize the complication. thanks, -chris