Re: [RESEND][RFC][PATCH 2/7] implementation of LSM hooks

Gene Heskett
2006-04-19T16:00:19Z

On Wednesday 19 April 2006 07:41, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>Quoting Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu):
>> On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:40:25 EDT, Kyle Moffett said:
>> > Perhaps the SELinux model should be extended to handle (dir-inode,
>> > path-entry) pairs. For example, if I want to protect the
>> > /etc/shadow file regardless of what tool is used to safely modify
>> > it, I would set
>>
>> Some of us think that the tools can protect /etc/shadow just fine on
>> their own, and are concerned with rogue software that abuses
>> /etc/shadow without bothering to safely modify it..
>
>Can you rephrase this? I'm don't understand what you're saying...
>
>My default response would have to be:
>> own, and are concerned with rogue software that abuses /etc/shadow
>> without bothering to safely modify it..
>
>rogue software like vi?

Don't you go pickin on vi now, ya hear?

>thanks,
>-serge
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

--
Cheers, Gene
People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word
'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's
stupid bounce rules. I do use spamassassin too. :-)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.