Comments on: Is SE Linux Unixish? http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/25/is-se-linux-unixish/ Linux, politics, and other interesting things Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:36:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Morris http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/25/is-se-linux-unixish/comment-page-1/#comment-15780 Morris Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:34:37 +0000 http://etbe.coker.com.au/?p=726#comment-15780 RSBAC is "unixish" as it is modular, smaller and simple, and allows for new modules to be easily hooked into and written for it. One of the unix ideals is that a program is small and does only what it needs to do. RSBAC fits this far more than SELinux does. RSBAC is “unixish” as it is modular, smaller and simple, and allows for new modules to be easily hooked into and written for it. One of the unix ideals is that a program is small and does only what it needs to do. RSBAC fits this far more than SELinux does.

]]> By: Tom http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/25/is-se-linux-unixish/comment-page-1/#comment-15514 Tom Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:01:17 +0000 http://etbe.coker.com.au/?p=726#comment-15514 :) OK, so I was right. A lot of people will argue that Linux should run (securely) on machines with 4 or 8mb of RAM(embedded devices, cell phones etc.). So not only is SELinux not Unixish, it also is not Linuxish. And you still haven't commented on Smack. (http://schaufler-ca.com/) Which is smaller, simpler and mainline. :)

OK, so I was right.
A lot of people will argue that Linux should run (securely) on machines with 4 or 8mb of RAM(embedded devices, cell phones etc.).
So not only is SELinux not Unixish, it also is not Linuxish.
And you still haven’t commented on Smack. (http://schaufler-ca.com/) Which is smaller, simpler and mainline.

]]>