From: richard offer <offer@sgi.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@epoch.ncsc.mil>
Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher <ag@bestbits.at>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
lsm <linux-security-module@wirex.com>, "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Tweedie <sct@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Extended Attributes for Security Modules
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 09:58:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <385390000.1050425884@changeling.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1050414107.16051.70.camel@moss-huskers.epoch.ncsc.mil>
* frm sds@epoch.ncsc.mil "04/15/03 09:41:48 -0400" | sed '1,$s/^/* /'
*
*
* Note that LSM intentionally does not provide any mechanism itself for
* sharing the security fields of the kernel data structures. Stacking has
* to be handled by the principal security module.
I see modules as empheral, but attritbutes as permanant. If I'm running one
LSM module, I reboot and use a different LSM module, what happens to the
attributes that the first module added to the file ?
Either we should guarantee that modules only touch attributes they know
about---ignoring all others (but not overwriting them), or we have separate
namespaces for each module's attributes.
Stacking modules will work with either scheme, but its seems to be that
switching policies over a reboot could easily be broken by a scheme that
shared a single namespace.
* --
* Stephen Smalley <sds@epoch.ncsc.mil>
* National Security Agency
richard.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Offer Technical Lead, Trust Technology, SGI
"Specialization is for insects"
_______________________________________________________________________
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-15 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-10 12:06 Stephen Smalley
2003-04-13 22:57 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2003-04-15 13:41 ` Stephen Smalley
2003-04-15 16:58 ` richard offer [this message]
2003-04-15 18:19 ` Stephen Smalley
2003-04-16 13:47 ` Stephen Smalley
2003-04-16 22:02 ` richard offer
2003-04-17 4:24 ` Stephen Smalley
2003-04-17 20:30 ` Chris Wright
2003-04-17 20:53 ` richard offer
2003-04-18 1:07 ` Chris Wright
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-15 18:33 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-15 18:56 ` Chris Wright
2003-04-08 20:26 Stephen Smalley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=385390000.1050425884@changeling.engr.sgi.com \
--to=offer@sgi.com \
--cc=ag@bestbits.at \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@wirex.com \
--cc=sct@redhat.com \
--cc=sds@epoch.ncsc.mil \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®