Re: auditctl se_sen & se_clr
On Friday 19 May 2006 15:30, Michael C Thompson wrote:
This leads me to believe either our definition of se_sen is wrong, or
if
our definition of se_sen is correct, then the implementation of se_sen
has some bug in it.
You may need to take this discussion to the LSPP mail list where more SE Linux
folks are watching. Darryl and Dustin did that work. Might be good to ask
Darryl about this.
-Steve