eldavojohn writes: "The KernelTrap highlights an interesting discussion on pluggable security models including some commentary by Linus Torvalds. While Torvalds argued against pluggable schedulers, he's all for pluggable security. Other members were arguing against the pluggable nature of the Linux Security Model (LSM) although Mr. T put his foot down and said it stays. When asked why his stance was different between schedulers & security he replied, 'Schedulers can be objectively tested. There's this thing called 'performance', that can generally be quantified on a load basis. Yes, you can have crazy ideas in both schedulers and security. Yes, you can simplify both for a particular load. Yes, you can make mistakes in both. But the *discussion* on security seems to never get down to real numbers. So the difference between them is simple: one is hard science. The other one is people wanking around with their opinions.' There's nary a dull moment in kernel development."