From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] One more attempt at useful kernel lockdown Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 13:02:55 -0700 Message-ID: <522E296F.9090307@zytor.com> References: <1378741786-18430-1-git-send-email-matthew.garrett@nebula.com> <19562.1378747124@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <27562.1378753264@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <522E2487.90109@zytor.com> <522E27DF.8020409@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Josh Boyer Cc: Valdis Kletnieks , David Lang , Matthew Garrett , "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" , Kees Cook , Greg KH , "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" , James Morris , linux-security-module List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On 09/09/2013 12:58 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> This is the term "capability" in the general sense, not the POSIX >> implementation thereof. > > See the whole last paragraph. Particularly the last sentence. > Yes. I disagree with not being able to use standard terminology. -hpa