Re: [PATCH] 3 of 5 IMA: LSM-based measurement code

[Reiner Sailer <sailer@us.ibm.com>]

Serge E. Hallyn (serue@us.ibm.com) wrote:
>
> That's true, of course.  Reiner, would any of the integrity measurement
> hooks be moved to a better place than the current LSM hooks?  Is there a
> preferred ordering - ie measurement should always happen before the LSM
> modules, or always after?  Either of these would of course be clear
> reasons to separate IMA into its own subsystem.
> 
> thanks,
> -serge

Originally, IMA was not an LSM. However, when moving to a 2.6 kernel, we 
moved it to LSM and have found very easily the current hooks. I don't think 
the hook position would change when moving from LSM to non-LSM.

Thanks
Reiner