upcomming 0.2 release

Heiko Zuerker heiko at zuerker.org
Sun Jan 9 07:24:50 PST 2005


Robert Connolly wrote:

>On January 8, 2005 05:24 pm, Archaic wrote:
>  
>
>>On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 02:45:32PM -0500, Robert Connolly wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>To encourage people to join in and help I'm trying to do things that
>>>people request. The uClibc addition was a popular idea. There have been
>>>several requests for selinux in the passed year. If there are more urgent
>>>things to do I would like to know what they are and I'll try to do them
>>>next instead.
>>>      
>>>
>>I think SELinux gets more requests merely because it is more well known.
>>I'm curious, though, if it is actually any better. Add to that the
>>distro-specific nature of future SELinux support, it seems we should
>>test the waters with RBAC. If we like it, use it. If not, go with
>>SELinux. It seems one or the other, but not both, should be the focus so
>>the book stays unified and consistant. Support could be a nightmare,
>>otherwise.
>>    
>>
>
>Well, the Grsec people are animate that their rbac is just as good, or better, 
>than selinux. I honestly don't know either way. But ya, supporting both would 
>be pretty bad. It wouldn't just add to complexity and problems, it would 
>multiply them.
>
>  
>
Not only they say it's better, but take a look at this: 
http://www.grsecurity.net/lsm.php


-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org




More information about the hlfs-dev mailing list