Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: SE-PgSQL patch review

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SE-PgSQL patch review
Date: 2009-12-01 19:46:27
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 20:28 -0800, David Fetter wrote:
>> This is totally separate from the really important question of whether
>> SE-Linux has a future, and another about whether, if SE-Linux has a
>> future, PostgreSQL needs to go there.

> Why would we think that it doesn't?

Have you noticed anyone except Red Hat taking it seriously?

I work for Red Hat and have drunk a reasonable amount of the SELinux
koolaid, but I can't help observing that it's had very limited uptake
outside Red Hat.  It's not clear that there are many people who find
it a cost-effective solution to their problems.  As for the number of
people prepared to write custom policy for it --- which would be
required to use it effectively for almost any PG application ---
I could probably hold a house party for all of them and not break a
sweat serving drinks.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-12-01 19:51:08
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous:From: Greg StarkDate: 2009-12-01 19:41:57
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group