From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936422AbXGSNBF (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:01:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760077AbXGSNAt (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:00:49 -0400 Received: from mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.5]:54060 "EHLO mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757889AbXGSNAr (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:00:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:00:45 -0400 (EDT) From: James Morris X-X-Sender: jmorris@d.namei To: "Serge E. Hallyn" cc: Andrew Morton , Chris Wright , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Smalley , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface In-Reply-To: <20070719124244.GA7219@vino.hallyn.com> Message-ID: References: <20070718183503.541026f8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070719073948.GI18840@lisa.in-ulm.de> <20070719122424.GA5186@vino.hallyn.com> <20070719124244.GA7219@vino.hallyn.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > It's already pretty clear. > > I doubt anyone not on lkml or linux-security-module has heard of this. > > So we'll see. > > (I was, obviously, talking about end-users) If distributions are shipping binary modules and other out of tree code to their users, then they should bear responsibility for supporting and maintaining the infrastructure required for it, and not expect upstream maintainers to do it for them. Additionally, if they want to expose their users to risks arising from broken and unecessary infrastructure, then they should bear the cost and responsibility of doing that and not expect others to do so as well. I don't see how this is even slightly difficult to understand. - James -- James Morris