On 6/6/2017 4:58 AM, José Bollo wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 16:59:24 -0700 > Casey Schaufler <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 6/1/2017 4:38 PM, James Morris wrote: >>> On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Casey Schaufler wrote: >>> >>>> Subject: [PATCH] procfs: add smack subdir to attrs >>> Is there value in this without major stacking support? >> Yes. If a Smack aware application reads /proc/self/attr/current >> it has no way to know if what it sees is a Smack label or an >> SELinux context. True, the application can look elsewhere >> (i.e. /sys/kernel/security/lsm) to find out which is enabled. >> But the real fix is for Smack to use a different interface >> than SELinux. Which is what this does. True, it will be even >> more important when/if major stacking comes in, but it is still >> significant now, and I would like to have it regardless of >> the future acceptance of major stacking. > I agree that it is a nice forward movement to leave the mud. > > I have a subsidiary question to ask. Should we keep the name 'attr' for > the subdirectory? It seems at least convenient but if a better name is > valuable (security, lsm, ...) why not to switch now?
Too many things would break. It's really a matter of taste in any case. > > BR josé > >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe >> linux-security-module" in the body of a message to >> [email protected] More majordomo info at >> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
