[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: SELinux removed from desktop cd spin?



Andrew Farris wrote:
Douglas McClendon wrote:
Andrew Farris wrote:
Douglas McClendon wrote:
I sincerely hope that what I've said will cause you to think a little more before uttering "I hope everyone agrees with me that more security is always better" again. But I welcome you to crush my hopes as I've just crushed yours.

SELinux can and very likely will protect computer systems for terrorist's use just as easily as anyone else, since it is 1) free, 2) available to the entire known universe; it therefore has nothing whatsoever to do with US national security in the context of your 'rhetoric' and poorly argued politics.

I was really talking about whether the choice to use torture to improve national security, without considering the other values lost in the decision, was a wise one to make.

The parallel was whether or not the choice to *ALWAYS* use selinux to improve computer security, without considering the other values (bloat/performance degradation/user frustration), was not a wise one to make.

But sometimes the subtlety of my logic goes over people's heads.

Oh I followed your intention, I just disagree with whether that parallel is a fair or even logical one to make about whether selinux is *in* the official spins as opposed to *forcing* people to enable it, which is the difference between effecting your choice or not.

No, please reread what I said.

It was never about the choice to force people to enable it.

It was about the decision to mandate that *every* official fedora spin had it enabled by default.

I contend that that there is room for enough official spins, such that >0 will have selinux not enabled by default.

The target of the rant was advocating that exactly 0 official fedora spins have selinux not enabled be default.

-dmc



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]