From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Morris Subject: Re: [redhat-lspp] Re: [RFC 3/7] NetLabel: CIPSOv4 engine Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:33:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <20060621194234.979661000@flek.zko.hp.com> <20060621200031.589235000@flek.zko.hp.com> <20060622.021223.125894633.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: David Miller , Paul Moore , jmorris@redhat.com, Stephen Smalley , RedHat LSPP , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, SELinux List , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Steve Grubb Return-path: To: Joe Nall In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Joe Nall wrote: > For all of the EAL4 LSPP Linux evaluation work is being done by Red > Hat/IBM/HP/atsec and others to be useful to integrators, there has to be basic > (e.g. CIPSO) multilevel network interoperability with existing multilevel > systems and good (e.g IPSec) multilevel networking between SELinux systems. Just to be clear, my understanding is that the native xfrm labeling is suitable for LSPP evaluation, as distinct from CIPSO being desired by system integrators from an interoperability point of view. - James -- James Morris