Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-08 Thread Tetsuo Handa
> >>>>>>>> On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concu

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-08 Thread John Johansen
;>>> On 05/07/2015 04:22 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 2015-05-07 at 14:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Casey Schaufler >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/7/2015

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-08 Thread Kees Cook
;> On Thu, 2015-05-07 at 14:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Casey Schaufler >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Scha

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-08 Thread Casey Schaufler
t;> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Casey Schaufler >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-08 Thread Mimi Zohar
; >>> wrote: > >>>> On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: > >>>>> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs > >>>>> Pl

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-07 Thread Casey Schaufler
t;>>>> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs >>>>> Please add all of the Acked-by etc. from the patch review process. >>>> For v21 I had Ack

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-07 Thread Stephen Smalley
On 05/07/2015 04:22 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Thu, 2015-05-07 at 14:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Casey Schaufler >> wrote: >>> On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: >>>> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: >

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-07 Thread Mimi Zohar
On Thu, 2015-05-07 at 14:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Casey Schaufler > wrote: > > On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: > >> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: > >> > >>> Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multi

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-07 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: >> On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: >> >>> Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs >> Please add all of the Acked-by etc. from the patch rev

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-07 Thread Stephen Smalley
On 05/02/2015 05:44 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs > > Replace the current ad hoc stacking of the capabilities > and Yama security modules with a generalized stacking scheme. > > The old structure had a single set of modu

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-07 Thread Casey Schaufler
On 5/7/2015 4:37 AM, James Morris wrote: > On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: > >> Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs > Please add all of the Acked-by etc. from the patch review process. For v21 I had Acks from: John Johansen

Re: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-07 Thread James Morris
On Sat, 2 May 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: > Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs Please add all of the Acked-by etc. from the patch review process. -- James Morris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of

[PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs

2015-05-02 Thread Casey Schaufler
Subject: [PATCH 0/7 v22] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs Replace the current ad hoc stacking of the capabilities and Yama security modules with a generalized stacking scheme. The old structure had a single set of module hooks contained in a security_operations structure. This structure was