On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Robert Joerdens wrote: > Plus: There is kernel-patch-2.4-lsm. And last time i checked 2.4 was still the > default kernel. So we can build on (manybe recommend) kernel-patch-2.4-lsm.
Ah, thats good to know. > > Then, this would need to be someone who has a bit of insight into > > linux security modules, in order to explain him why he should change it, > > and to make sure that it actually doesn't harm security. > > He favours including LSM. > > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200312/msg01713.html> Yes, I have quoted that same link some messages ago, note that the proposal includes a patch that compiles LSM but it doesn't compile it as a module (which is what we need). Anyhow, I am going to file an ITP of the realtime LSM, as it seems that this is the preferred method of aquiring realtime privileges, then we try to solve the rest. Guenter
