Re: [PATCH try #3] security: Convert LSM into a static interface

[James Morris]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:

> > It's already pretty clear.
> 
> I doubt anyone not on lkml or linux-security-module has heard of this.
> 
> So we'll see.
> 
> (I was, obviously, talking about end-users)

If distributions are shipping binary modules and other out of tree code to 
their users, then they should bear responsibility for supporting and 
maintaining the infrastructure required for it, and not expect upstream 
maintainers to do it for them.

Additionally, if they want to expose their users to risks arising from 
broken and unecessary infrastructure, then they should bear the cost and 
responsibility of doing that and not expect others to do so as well.

I don't see how this is even slightly difficult to understand.



- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>
-
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/