> I submit that the AppArmor model is valid, even if it totally failed all > of David Gilbert's questions (I think AppArmor can actually provide > about half of what he asked for).
The model looks valid. I have difficulty constructing many scenarios where its useful but it appears valid providing you can tightly control file renaming, which is very very questionable. There are also some very awkward path based issues around shared file objects (your controlling tty and TIOCSTI for one) that I need to look at the code for once the VFS stuff is sorted and its likely to get merged. Alan - 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
