From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
casey@schaufler-ca.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Version 3 (2.6.23-rc8) Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 17:18:55 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0710021714100.3579@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071003011033.5bfc9165@the-village.bc.nu>
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> Smack seems a perfectly good simple LSM module, its clean, its based upon
> credible security models and sound theory (unlike AppArmor).
The problem with SELinux isn't the theory. It's the practice.
IOW, it's too hard to use.
Apparently Ubuntu is giving up on it too, for that reason.
And what some people seem to have trouble admitting is that theory counts
for nothing, if the practice isn't there.
So quite frankly, the SELinux people would look at whole lot smarter if
they didn't blather on about "theory".
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-03 0:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-30 0:20 Casey Schaufler
2007-09-30 8:16 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-30 8:42 ` Andi Kleen
2007-09-30 17:14 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-09-30 17:34 ` Andi Kleen
2007-09-30 23:24 ` david
2007-09-30 17:29 ` Joshua Brindle
2007-09-30 17:39 ` Andi Kleen
2007-09-30 19:07 ` Theodore Tso
2007-09-30 20:05 ` Andi Kleen
2007-09-30 20:22 ` Theodore Tso
2007-10-01 20:28 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-09-30 20:18 ` Paul Moore
2007-09-30 9:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-09-30 17:19 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-02 8:36 ` Thomas Bleher
2007-09-30 17:02 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-09-30 20:30 ` Paul Moore
2007-10-01 11:33 ` James Morris
2007-10-01 15:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-01 15:40 ` Stephen Smalley
2007-10-01 16:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-01 17:54 ` Olivier Galibert
2007-10-02 21:02 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-02 21:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-02 23:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-03 0:12 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-04 22:56 ` Derek Fawcus
2007-10-04 23:18 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 23:44 ` Derek Fawcus
2007-10-03 5:32 ` Crispin Cowan
2007-10-03 3:54 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-03 4:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-05 1:44 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-05 3:04 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-10-05 4:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-05 5:48 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-10-05 16:27 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-05 18:42 ` Stephen Smalley
2007-10-05 20:08 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-05 20:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-08 17:50 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-08 18:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-08 18:53 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-10-08 21:05 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-08 16:18 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-10-08 17:31 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-09 13:52 ` Stephen Smalley
2007-10-09 16:02 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-08 23:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-08 16:06 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-10-08 17:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-08 18:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-10-08 19:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-08 19:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-08 20:39 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-08 21:02 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-08 21:20 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-10 13:48 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-10 15:45 ` Stephen Smalley
2007-10-10 17:57 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-11 10:46 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-10-11 15:41 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-11 18:53 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-10-11 20:09 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-08 21:51 ` Crispin Cowan
2007-10-30 4:01 ` Kazuki Omo(Company)
2007-10-30 15:07 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-08 20:25 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-08 20:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-06 19:14 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-03 0:10 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-03 0:18 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-10-01 16:39 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-01 19:00 ` Theodore Tso
2007-10-01 15:38 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-10-01 20:49 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-01 3:47 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-10-01 4:15 ` Casey Schaufler
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=alpine.LFD.0.999.0710021714100.3579@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
/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®