On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 09:06:40PM -0400, James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Chris Mason wrote: > > > > The incomplete mediation flows from the design, since the pathname-based > > > mediation doesn't generalize to cover all objects unlike label- or > > > attribute-based mediation. And the "use the natural abstraction for > > > each object type" approach likewise doesn't yield any general model or > > > anything that you can analyze systematically for data flow. > > > > This feels quite a lot like a repeat of the discussion at the kernel > > summit. There are valid uses for path based security, and if they don't > > fit your needs, please don't use them. But, path based semantics alone > > are not a valid reason to shut out AA. > > The validity or otherwise of pathname access control is not being > discussed here. > > The point is that the pathname model does not generalize, and that > AppArmor's inability to provide adequate coverage of the system is a > design issue arising from this. I'm sorry, but I don't see where in the paragraphs above you aren't making a general argument against the pathname model. -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
