[NTLUG:Discuss] Last meeting, you CAN have hotplugged devices automount without desktop

[Chris Cox]

Ted Gould wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 23:18 -0600, Chris Cox wrote:
>> Robert Pearson wrote:
>>> How would you control access to these devices to include some users
>>> and exclude others?
>> Well... my guess is that perhaps PolicyKit would allow one to
>> define devices for access differently between users.  Not exactly
>> the panacea everything to everyone idea... more like this user
>> can do these kinds of things with these kinds of devices.
> 
> Yes, it should.  But considering PolicyKit isn't really out in the wild,
> and you're commenting on how it is done today (while mentioning that the
> *Kits are useless) they don't really gel.  Yes, PolicyKit will help to
> fix this issue, but that's the future.  Today we don't have a security
> framework that can deal with that complexity.
> 
>>> Perhaps there is a simple Security design. Sometimes I complicate things.
>>> The "Rule of Thumb" in the past was "Better Safe Than Sorry" so access
>>> was very restrictive for private Information in public places.
>> Complicated security implementations usually end up dying.  Just
>> my own observation.
> 
> Are you saying that PolicyKit will die?  AppArmor?  SELinux?

AppArmor is simple... but may die just because.  SELinux... sheesh...
must die.  We'll have to see how PolicyKit comes out.  I may be
very useful.  Or it could be the UCE of Linux, not enough
benefit to be useful (especially if painful to configure or if
it doesn't make sense).