* Chris Mason ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I'm sure people there will have a different versions of events. The
one part that was discussed was if pathname based security was
useful, and a number of the people in the room (outside of
novell) said it was. Now, it could be that nobody wanted to
* Andreas Gruenbacher ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Reiserfs currently only marks the .reiserfs_priv directory as private, but
not the files below it -- how about the attached patch to fix that?
I don't think that's right. Look at -create or -lookup. Both of those
properly set the private flag.
* Tony Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Remove redundant check from proc_setattr()
Indeed, I'll take that straight away.
thanks,
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-fsdevel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
* Trond Myklebust ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 18:44 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Just FYI: Al was very opposed to the idea of passing the vfsmount to
the vfs_ helpers, so you should discuss this with him.
Looking at the actual patches I see you're lazy in a lot
* Casey Schaufler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
They are being posted now as a request for comment.
Presently the AppArmor
code - being a user of the LSM interface - does not
receive the vfsmount
correspoding to an operation and has to employ
convoluted and slow mechanisms
in an
* Christoph Hellwig ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 01:57:56PM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
Note that this
approach may be controversial [1]; it has been suggested that we
should instead be modifying all filesystem types to support security
(and other) xattrs natively,
