On 10/28/2016 2:28 AM, James Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>
>> The 3/3 patch is forward looking, I'll admit. Userspace
>> can start getting ready for the combined format in
>> advance of multiple major modules. When complete module
>> stacking patches are available I
On 10/28/2016 2:28 AM, James Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>
>> The 3/3 patch is forward looking, I'll admit. Userspace
>> can start getting ready for the combined format in
>> advance of multiple major modules. When complete module
>> stacking patches are available I
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> The 3/3 patch is forward looking, I'll admit. Userspace
> can start getting ready for the combined format in
> advance of multiple major modules. When complete module
> stacking patches are available I don't want to be addressing
> "no userspace is
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> The 3/3 patch is forward looking, I'll admit. Userspace
> can start getting ready for the combined format in
> advance of multiple major modules. When complete module
> stacking patches are available I don't want to be addressing
> "no userspace is
On 10/27/2016 3:32 PM, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>
>> Create interfaces that make it possible to deal with process
>> attributes in the face of multiple "major" security modules.
> We don't have support for multiple major modules currently (perhaps ever),
>
On 10/27/2016 3:32 PM, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>
>> Create interfaces that make it possible to deal with process
>> attributes in the face of multiple "major" security modules.
> We don't have support for multiple major modules currently (perhaps ever),
>
On 10/27/2016 03:32 PM, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>
>> Create interfaces that make it possible to deal with process
>> attributes in the face of multiple "major" security modules.
>
> We don't have support for multiple major modules currently (perhaps
On 10/27/2016 03:32 PM, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>
>> Create interfaces that make it possible to deal with process
>> attributes in the face of multiple "major" security modules.
>
> We don't have support for multiple major modules currently (perhaps
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> Create interfaces that make it possible to deal with process
> attributes in the face of multiple "major" security modules.
We don't have support for multiple major modules currently (perhaps ever),
so I'm not merging infrastructure which is only
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> Create interfaces that make it possible to deal with process
> attributes in the face of multiple "major" security modules.
We don't have support for multiple major modules currently (perhaps ever),
so I'm not merging infrastructure which is only
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Casey Schaufler <ca...@schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH v6 0/3] LSM: security module information improvements
>
> Changes from v5:
> Rebased on 4.9-rc2
>
> Changes from v4:
> Use kasprintf instead of kzalloc()
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH v6 0/3] LSM: security module information improvements
>
> Changes from v5:
> Rebased on 4.9-rc2
>
> Changes from v4:
> Use kasprintf instead of kzalloc() ... sprintf in more p
Subject: [PATCH v6 0/3] LSM: security module information improvements
Changes from v5:
Rebased on 4.9-rc2
Changes from v4:
Use kasprintf instead of kzalloc() ... sprintf in more places.
More in the documentation.
Separate module information in contexts
Subject: [PATCH v6 0/3] LSM: security module information improvements
Changes from v5:
Rebased on 4.9-rc2
Changes from v4:
Use kasprintf instead of kzalloc() ... sprintf in more places.
More in the documentation.
Separate module information in contexts
14 matches
Mail list logo
