Preferred subj= with multiple LSMs

[James Morris]

On Tue, 16 Jul 2019, Paul Moore wrote:

> The subj_X approach is still backwards compatible, the difference is
> that old versions of the tools get a "?" for the LSM creds which is a
> rather sane way of indicating something is different.

This will still break existing userspace, right?  We can't do that.

> Once again, I believe that the subj_X approach is going to be faster
> than safely parsing the multiplexed format.

What about emitting one audit record for each LSM?

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris at namei.org>