From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933044AbXCHTBk (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:01:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933054AbXCHTBk (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:01:40 -0500 Received: from 216-99-217-87.dsl.aracnet.com ([216.99.217.87]:34715 "EHLO sous-sol.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933044AbXCHTBk (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:01:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:42:02 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: Casey Schaufler Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , Mimi Zohar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, safford@watson.ibm.com, serue@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kjhall@linux.vnet.ibm.com, zohar@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch 1/6] integrity: new hooks Message-ID: <20070308184202.GP6602@sequoia.sous-sol.org> References: <20070308170001.GA17304@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <33939.11500.qm@web36612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <33939.11500.qm@web36612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Casey Schaufler (casey@schaufler-ca.com) wrote: > > --- "Serge E. Hallyn" wrote: > > > > It's unfortunate, agreed, but > > > > use of LSM as an integrity framework was also a > > no-go. > > You're going to have to justify this assertion. > I know of at least one work-in-progress for which > LSM works just fine. Not to mention the Integrity > claims of SELinux. Serge is referring to the objections to EVM/IMA as LSM because it was not doing access control, rather integrity measurements. It's all in somewhere the archives. thanks, -chris