Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751045AbWC2Wva (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:51:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751152AbWC2Wva (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:51:30 -0500 Received: from 216-99-217-87.dsl.aracnet.com ([216.99.217.87]:9344 "EHLO sorel.sous-sol.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751045AbWC2Wv3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:51:29 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:52:41 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: Sam Vilain Cc: Chris Wright , "Eric W. Biederman" , Nick Piggin , Herbert Poetzl , Bill Davidsen , Linux Kernel ML Subject: Re: [RFC] Virtualization steps Message-ID: <20060329225241.GO15997@sorel.sous-sol.org> References: <1143228339.19152.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4428BB5C.3060803@tmr.com> <20060328085206.GA14089@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <4428FB29.8020402@yahoo.com.au> <20060328142639.GE14576@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <44294BE4.2030409@yahoo.com.au> <442A26E9.20608@vilain.net> <20060329182027.GB14724@sorel.sous-sol.org> <442B0BFE.9080709@vilain.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <442B0BFE.9080709@vilain.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1180 Lines: 26 * Sam Vilain (sam@vilain.net) wrote: > extern struct security_operations *security_ops; in > include/linux/security.h is the global I refer to. OK, I figured that's what you meant. The top-level ops are similar in nature to inode_ops in that there's not a real compelling reason to make them per process. The process context is (usually) available, and more importantly, the object whose access is being mediated is readily available with its security label. > There is likely to be some contention there between the security folk > who probably won't like the idea that your security module can be > different for different processes, and the people who want to provide > access to security modules on the systems they want to host or consolidate. I think the current setup would work fine. It's less likely that we'd want a separate security module for each container than simply policy that is container aware. thanks, -chris - 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/