| Date | Mon, 28 Aug 2017 13:38:26 +1000 (AEST) | From | James Morris <> | Subject | Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH net-next v7 00/10] Landlock LSM: Toward unprivileged sandboxing |
| |
On Mon, 21 Aug 2017, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> ## Why a new LSM? Are SELinux, AppArmor, Smack and Tomoyo not good enough? > > The current access control LSMs are fine for their purpose which is to give the > *root* the ability to enforce a security policy for the *system*. What is > missing is a way to enforce a security policy for any application by its > developer and *unprivileged user* as seccomp can do for raw syscall filtering. >
You could mention here that the first case is Mandatory Access Control, in general terms.
-- James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
|