--- David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This is SELinux specific funtionality and should be done in the > > SELinux code. You should not be adding interfaces that are SELinux > > specific, in this case using secids instead of the LSM blob interfaces. > > Is using secids your only objection? Or are you objecting to the whole > 'act-as' concept? My knee jerk reaction is that that is likely to be SELinux specific behavior as well. I'm going to have to look at the patch more carefully before I can say for sure. I will try to make a constructive proposal once I've had the chance to think on it a little. Sorry about the terse and unhelpful initial reaction. Casey Schaufler casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
