From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sean Subject: Re: [AppArmor 00/44] AppArmor security module overview Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 17:29:40 -0400 Message-ID: <20070627172940.1cabd5c4.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> References: <20070626230756.519733902@suse.de> <20070626165202.bfe8e6df.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070627022403.GB14656@suse.de> <20070626194700.5b0ff477.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070627151114.GM1094@stusta.de> <4682D13C.6060107@novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Adrian Bunk , Andrew Morton , John Johansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Crispin Cowan Return-path: Received: from bay0-omc2-s3.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.139]:54056 "EHLO bay0-omc2-s3.bay0.hotmail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753806AbXF0V3q (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2007 17:29:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4682D13C.6060107@novell.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:06:04 -0700 Crispin Cowan wrote: > I am hoping for a reconciliation where the people who don't like > AppArmor live with it by not using it. AppArmor is not intended to > replace SELinux, it is intended to address a different set of goals. You keep saying that. But for that to be true you'd have to believe _everyone_ using Novell distributions has needs that align exactly with AppArmor. Otherwise, how to explain that you don't offer and support both SELinux and AppArmor to your users? It seems as far as Novell is concerned, AppArmor _is_ meant to replace SELinux. Not that there is really anything wrong with that, but it's a little disingenuous to then argue that they're meant to coexist. Sean