Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/11] security: AppArmor - Overview

[Casey Schaufler]

--- Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> Seems like a strawman.  We aren't claiming that
> SELinux is perfect, and
> there is plenty of work ongoing on SELinux
> usability.  But a
> fundamentally unsound mechanism is more dangerous
> than one that is never
> enabled; at least in the latter case, one knows
> where one stands.  It is
> the illusory sense of security that accompanies
> path-based access
> control that is dangerous.

I suggest that this logic be applied to
the "strict policy", "targeted policy",
and "user written policy" presentations
of SELinux. You never know what the policy
might be.



Casey Schaufler
casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/