From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5845C28CC6 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 20:42:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C914A20848 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 20:42:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726352AbfFDUm3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jun 2019 16:42:29 -0400 Received: from namei.org ([65.99.196.166]:36780 "EHLO namei.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726033AbfFDUm2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jun 2019 16:42:28 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by namei.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x54KgCIO031551; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 20:42:12 GMT Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 06:42:12 +1000 (AEST) From: James Morris To: Casey Schaufler cc: Stephen Smalley , casey.schaufler@intel.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org, john.johansen@canonical.com, penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, paul@paul-moore.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/58] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20190602165101.25079-1-casey@schaufler-ca.com> <66a87b0b-b6f4-74ff-2e51-afc8e2d30de1@schaufler-ca.com> <2a9049a7-6259-5ae0-2790-0aaf337c51a4@tycho.nsa.gov> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > It isn't free so there should be a cost/benefit analysis. > > Some benchmarking is definitely in order, but most > of what's you're calling out as downside is hypothetical > or based on assumption. When you're proposing changes such as these, which make fundamental and far-reaching changes, the burden is on you to present the cost/benefit analysis. You can't just say "Here are some changes and here are the benefits, and any possible costs are merely hypothetical". -- James Morris