I have written Smack. I need an LSM infrastructure. I would prefer the old dynamic version. I no trouble with the static version.
I think that a dynamic version is more useful, but I didn't want what I'm doing to have it as a dependency, so I made sure that it isn't. The debate about the inclusion of Smack can remain blissfully separate from the dynamic/static LSM debate. This is by design. I have had a couple people suggest changes to Smack that would be very elegently handled as stacked modules. These include "owned" ports and additional uid restrictions. Since Smack is a MAC module these other security features are not really appropriate to include (if you want the Security Monolith there is SELinux) in it, but certainly make sense to combine with it. A stacker that does not require module participation could be quite interesting. In the old day I felt that a security solution had to include all aspects of control, but today I see the value provided by independent mechanisms such as IPtables. Casey Schaufler [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
