On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:44:39AM +0100, Karol Lewandowski wrote: > [ Sorry for breaking thread and resend - gmane rejected my original message > due to too long list of recipients... ] > > On 2014-10-30 00:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > There is a 1815 line documentation file in this series, so we aren't > > trying to not provide this type of information here at all. But yes, > > more background, about why this can't be done in userspace (zero copy, > > less context switches, proper credential passing, timestamping, availble > > at early-boot, LSM hooks for security models to tie into > > While you're at it... I did some work on proof-of-concept LSM patches for > kdbus some time ago, see [1][2]. Currently, these are completely of date. > > [1] https://github.com/lmctl/linux/commits/kdbus-lsm-v4.for-systemd-v212 > [2] https://github.com/lmctl/kdbus/commit/aa0885489d19be92fa41c6f0a71df28763228a40 > > May I ask if you guys have your own plan for LSM or maybe it would be > worth to resurrect [1]? The core calls are already mediated by LSM today, right? We don't want anyone to be parsing the data stream through an LSM, that idea got rejected a long time ago as something that is really not a good idea. Other than that, I don't know exactly what your patches do, or why they are needed, care to go into details? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
