SELinux removed from desktop cd spin?

[Andrew Farris]

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.

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul at gmail.com> <ajfarris at gmail.com>
  gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----