On Thursday 31 March 2005 01:08 pm, Stephen Smalley wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 12:17 -0600, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
> I suspect there will be questions framed around specific parts of this
> design and I will address them as they come. However, please keep in
> mind that we are not auditing based on content, but "name".
Or possibly location.
> This is _not_ a general purpose file system auditing solution.
Ah, bad statement to make when seeking acceptance into a general purpose
operating system. Better to say that this is intended to complement the
existing support for auditing based on (device,inode) pair to fill a
specific gap, namely preservation of audit on particular locations
across transactions?
Can you tell that I'm an inexperienced kernel developer yet :)? Haha.
-tim