It occurs to me that my previous reply was unnecessarily long and
missed the point.  Trying again:

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Andrew G. Morgan <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Andrew G. Morgan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> My Nack remains that you are eliminating the explicit enforcement of
>>> selective inheritance. A lockable secure bit protecting access to your
>>> prctl() function would address this concern.
>>
>> Would a sysctl or securebit that *optionally* allows pA to be disabled
>> satisfy you?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It would be kind of nice to remove your nack.  I think that the above
is the relevant question.  Could you answer it?

--Andy
--
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/

Reply via email to