Subject: Re: kern.showallprocs implementation
To: Martin Husemann <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/30/2005 09:08:11
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 03:43:03PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> > So then what name do you propose? security.bsd.?
> I probably did not pay attention close enough for the start of this threa=
> have memory swapped out, but I fail to understand the "bsd" part in this
> name. Can someone explain it? Are we going to see a "security.linux" node
> someday? Why not just "security"?
I agree with Steve that we should find out why FreeBSD chose this name.
I do not think we will see "linux", but I expect we will see other values.
I think the reason we want something here, and not "security", is that=20
this describes features/attributes/controls that are based on a UID/GID-
centered security model.
If we got with an ACL-based model or an attribute-based model, then I=20
would expect us to have other nodes under security related to policy for=20
them. I also understand FreeBSD has a "jail" section under "security".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----