Re: [AppArmor #5 0/13] AppArmor security module

[Miklos Szeredi]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, John Johansen wrote:
> This is the fifth general posting of the newest version of the
> AppArmor security module it has been rewritten to use the security_path
> hooks instead of the previous vfs approach.  The current implementation
> is aimed at being as semantically close to previous versions of AppArmor
> as possible while using the existing LSM infrastructure.
> 
> Development is on going and
> improvements to file, capability, network, resource usage and ipc mediation
> are planned.
> 
> With this submission we believe AppArmor is ready for inclusion into
> the kernel.
> 
> _Issues NOT specifically addressed_
> * The d_namespace_path function still manually strips the " (deleted)"
>   string that __d_path appends.  A fix to __d_path is being pursued
>   independently of the AppArmor submission.

Latest posting on that front:

  http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/7/6/186

Thanks,
Miklos
--
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/