Richard Pieri wrote: > Because SELinux requires a great deal of sysadmin time and effort and > expertise to craft the jails and security policies. > > gsecurity does all this right out of the box.
I got what you meant, but that's a UI or config layer problem. What I'm saying is that gsecurity could have used the SELinux (or AppArmor, or whatever) Linux Security Module[1] to implement their rules, and wrap it with their own UI or config system to make it turn key and less error prone. Hopefully someone will point out that there was a technical justification for not reusing an existing LSM. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Security_Modules -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA "Enterprise solutions through open source." Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/ _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
