Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Oct 2002 13:50:01 +0100 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] remove sys_security |
| |
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 12:04:00AM -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote: > >I know. but hiding them doesn't make them any better.. > > > Actuall, yes it does, and that is the point. You don't have to like > SELinux's system calls, or any other module's syscalls. The whole point > of LSM was to decouple security design from the Linux kernel development.
But I dislike the notation of module syscalls. Syscalls are a global thing and they shall not be registered without proper review from all kernel developers. Driver development is untangled from kernel development, too and it doesn;t need syscalls.
> There are a butt-load of different access control models, and many of > them are not compatible with one another. You wouldn't want to support > them all--that would be serious bloat. So instead, LSM lets each user > choose the model that suits them:
Fucking no! Don't add syscall interfaces without review. Adding a new syscall for a "security modules" is sign that you got your design wrong.
> * server users can choose a highly secure model > * workstation users can choose something desktop oriented > * embedded people can choose nothing at all, or the specific > narrow-cast model that they need
Blah, blah, blah. You don't get more security by pluggin in a buggy module.
> On the other hand: what is the big cost here? One system call. Isn't > that actually *lower* overhead than the (say) half dozen > security-oriented syscalls we might convince you to accept if we drop > the sys_security syscall as you suggest? Why the fierce desire to remove > something so cheap?
It's the broken design. Look at windows: it has tons of cheap features - and exactly because of that it's such a piece of crap.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |