this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2025
99 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

10737 readers
726 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Stemming from a security researcher and his team proposing a new Linux Security Module (LSM) three years ago and it not being accepted to the mainline kernel, he raised issue over the lack of review/action to Linus Torvalds and the mailing lists. In particular, seeking more guidance for how new LSMs should be introduced and raised the possibility of taking the issue to the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board (TAB).

This mailing list post today laid out that a proposed TSEM LSM for a framework for generic security modeling was proposed but saw little review activity in the past three years or specific guidance on getting that LSM accepted to the Linux kernel. Thus seeking documented guidance on new Linux Security Module submissions for how they should be optimally introduced otherwise the developers are "prepared to pursue this through the [Technical Advisory Board] if necessary."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] rmt@programming.dev -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

If the lowest paid intern gets to use AI, then it will probably help them configure it properly.. the docs generally aren't bad (of the ones I've seen/used), but they're not newbie/intern level docs.

edit: That's a lot of downvotes for suggesting AI is useful at a primarily language/grammatical problem (ie. helping to crafting security/sandbox policy DSLs from terse docs and examples)? I detect some gut-reaction insecurities in these parts. ๐Ÿ™ƒ

I barely trust natural intelligence with anything relating to security.