User-visible changes regarding TOMOYO 1.8 since last report: I removed verbose= option which controls whether or not to print policy violation warning messages when policy violation occurred. Instead, to be able to know whether policy violation occurred or not, I added /proc/ccs/stat interface. You can check whether any policy violation has occurred or not by reading /proc/ccs/stat and check what the policy violation was by reading /proc/ccs/reject_log . Also, file_pattern keyword support was removed. Converting pathnames using wildcards will be done in the userspace. Currently, TOMOYO distinguishes whether a pathname refers a directory or not by whether that pathname ends with '/' or not. This is legacy of TOMOYO when there were only read/write/execute permissions (using 4 2 1 respectively). Therefore, for example, to allow renaming all files and directories under home directories, you have to specify separately like file rename /home/\{\*\}/ /home/\{\*\}/ file rename /home/\{\*\}/\* /home/\{\*\}/\* . But nowadays, you can add conditions like path1.type=directory as needed. Therefore, I think it is fine to remove distinction by trailing '/' and aggregate like file rename /home/\{\*\}/\* /home/\{\*\}/\* . You can specify like file rename /home/\{\*\}/\* /home/\{\*\}/\* path1.type!=directory path2.type!=directory if you want to forbid renaming directories. Removing distinction by trailing '/' has a side effect. Until now, you were able to specify like file mkdir /home/\{\*\}/ but you will have to explicitly specify basename part like file mkdir /home/\{\*\}/\* if this distinction is removed. Is it acceptable for you to remove this distinction in TOMOYO 1.8? Please reply if you have problems with removing this distinction. If no objections, I will remove this distinction in order to simplify code. Regards.