Denis Leroy wrote:
max wrote:Denis Leroy wrote:It make as much sense as the rest of this thread and what it proposes. Yes I realize this is extreme but no more extreme in my view than disabled by default or offering the option at install time. There is already a way to disable it if you know enough and if you don't then you need it on anyway. For crying out loud my girlfriend uses Fedora, her use is much closer to average than any of the rest of us and SELinux has *never* caused her a problem. My mother, as computer illiterate as they come( no disrespect intended Mom) does not have any problems. This conversation is pointless, I see a hundred posts about people complaining about people discussing things like the GPL on a developer's list, a subject quite relevant in my view, but when the idea of disabling practically the only security present on the system is brought up , it actually gets entertained? Disable it?!?What?!? It seems to me that entirely too many people have their priorities seriously out of whack.max bianco wrote:Can an option to completely disable the ability to disable SELinux be added? I'd rather there was no way to turn it off at all.that doesn't make *any* senseyou are COMPLETELY missing the point. In some context, security is irrelevant. Like that Fedora system we use in our lab at work for bringup testing: it doesn't even have a network card.
The last time I looked a computer without internet access is completely useless to the average user. What do you think the majority of people are doing with their computers? playing solitaire? No network card is not the norm. Anyway what's to stop some disgruntled employee from quietly loading a program onto your test box that will have you scratching your head for days because you can't imagine what might be wrong. I think you have missed my point, probably because I failed to express it adequately so I will drop it. This insanity isn't worth discussing anyway.