[RFC 0/3] Safe, dynamically (un)loadable LSMs
james.l.morris at oracle.com
Thu Dec 7 00:00:31 UTC 2017
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> Should I respin this patch sans module unloading? Still a set of dynamic
> hooks that are independent to allow for sealable memory support.
> I'm also wondering what people think of the fs change? I don't think
> that it makes a lot of sense just having one giant list. I was thinking
> it might make more sense using the module_name instead.
I don't know how useful this will be in practice. Who/what will be
looking at these entries and why?
<james.l.morris at oracle.com>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive