Re: Preview of changes to the Security susbystem for 2.6.36

[Christian Stroetmann <stroetmann@ontolinux.com>]

Aloha Serge;
On the 02.08.2010 20:08, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Christian Stroetmann (stroetmann@ontolinux.com):
>    
>> Aloha James, Aloha Kees;
>> Ont the 02.08.2010 08:57,  Kees Cook wrote:
>>      
>>> On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 04:41:08PM +1000, James Morris wrote:
>>>        
>>>> On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>>          
>>>>> Well, at least I'll have something for my summit presentation again.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, it's rather hard for me to defend against a private NAK.
>>>>>            
>> A private NAK against a company's developer's OK
>> Where is the difference private and company? I thought that it
>> doesn't matter who and what a developer is, and where she/he comes
>> from.
>>      
> That's not what private means in this case.  A private nak is one made
> in a private email, so that the list - and the submitter - can't see the
> rationale.  It is problematic because it doesn't really allow the other
> party to address the objection.
>
> (No big deal - Christoph has since responded in public.)
>
>    

Sorry, but AFAIK the NAK by Christoph that I meant was written in a 
public e-mail with full context to the LSM mailing list some weeks ago 
around the end of June (23 June 2010?!) and I thought Kees meant this 
NAK. :D

But thanks for trying to clearify the case.

Sorry Kees, if you indeed meant with private NAK a NAK made in a private 
e-mail.

Have fun
Christian Stroetmann