Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751818AbbD3CLV (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2015 22:11:21 -0400 Received: from smtp.outflux.net ([198.145.64.163]:49821 "EHLO smtp.outflux.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751106AbbD3CLS (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2015 22:11:18 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 509 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 22:11:18 EDT Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 19:02:37 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: James Morris Cc: Casey Schaufler , Stephen Smalley , John Johansen , Paul Moore , LSM , James Morris , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Module stacking next steps Message-ID: <20150430020237.GY6100@outflux.net> References: <5536F260.3080201@schaufler-ca.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Outflux X-HELO: www.outflux.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1002 Lines: 31 On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:55:51AM +1000, James Morris wrote: > On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > > > > James, do you want to take the module stacking changes in through > > the security tree? Are there remaining objections or concerns? What > > procedure would you like to follow? > > What's the overall consensus on this -- do people generally see it as > useful and necessary, and is it ready to go in? At the very worst, I see it as a very nice clean up. At best, I see it as extremely useful for the things I want to do, with various "minor" LSM working together. > Any objections or concerns? As far as I'm concerned, I'm very happy with it. Thanks! -Kees -- Kees Cook @outflux.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/