| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep) |
| Date: | 2008-09-24 17:18:30 |
| Message-ID: | 48DA7666.80404@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua Drake wrote:
> I know of no one that really uses SELinux because it is a nightmare. On
> the other hand, this type of security is required to get into certain
> scary tin foil hat producing institutions.
Yeah, but do we even have the slightest bit of information about what
exactly would be required to achieve the required levels? And whether
this patch does it? And whether there would be alternative, more
desirable ways to achieve a similar level?
I am not arguing for or against this patch now, but I would like to know
whether someone has an agenda for it. Without an agenda, future
maintenance will be difficult. Reference to standards or other public
documents would work best to define that agenda.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-09-24 17:24:59 | Re: FSM, now without WAL-logging |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-09-24 17:12:05 | Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep) |