On Tuesday 16 May 2006 08:21, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > I want to open up discussion of removal of the secadm_t policy and > roling it into sysadm_t and make auditadm_r match what Michael and Casey > have defined.
I really think the original intent of the secadm role was to separate audit use/control from admin role. I think the role name may have lead to confusion and people then wanted an audit admin role because that *was* needed. Then the problem became "what is the definition of the security admin?" So, I vote for combining secadm with sysadm. -Steve -- redhat-lspp mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-lspp
