Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Apr 2003 12:15:17 -0700 | From | Chris Wright <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Extended Attributes for Security Modules against 2.5.68 |
| |
* Andreas Dilger (adilger@clusterfs.com) wrote: > > Well, with the exception of backup/restore (which will just treat this > EA data as opaque and doesn't really care whether the names are fixed > or not), the tools DO need to understand each individual module > or policy in order to make any sense of the data. Otherwise, all you > can do is print out some binary blob which is no use to anyone.
I was imagining strings, not binary blobs, sorry for the confusion.
> So, either the tools look for "system.security", and then have to > understand an internal magic for each module to know what to do with > the data, or it looks for "system.<modulename>" for only module names > that it actually understands.
Or simply print the strings associated with the label.
> The only reason to use a common "system.security" is if the actual data > stored therein was usable by more than a single security module.
Or, as mentioned, if you care to print out the label with standard fileutils.
cheers, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - 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/
| |