Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > So I still don't like the way it exposes LSM internal data to the > file system code, but given how long it's taking for me to create > a better solution I don't think that I can in all fairness say NAK > to David Quigley's sysfs patch any longer. I withdraw my objection, > while maintaining my reservations. Until I see it wired up against another filesystem I retain my objections. When I asked he pretty much told me that it doesn't generalize to other filesystems well and it is a sysfs special case. The way sysctl and proc are wired as special cases into the lsm has been a maintenance disaster so far, and I think it a very bad idea to add yet another lsm special case, that supports only one filesystem. Eric -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
