Messages in this thread | | | From | Stefan Monnier <monnier+lists/linux/kernel/news/@TEQUILA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU> | Subject | sockfs (was: setting access rights to priviledged ports) | Date | 16 Oct 1998 17:31:36 -0400 |
| |
>>>>> "David" == David Lang <dlang@diginsite.com> writes: > Linux has this with the ipfwadm transparent proxy capability (I assume > that ipchains has similar support as well) the line is similar to the one > below
> ipfwadm -I -a accept -r 10025 -p tcp -S 0.0.0.0/0 -D (youtIP)/32 25
> set sendmail to use port 10025 and you are done.
Yes, there are hundreds of ways to circumvent the `you have to be root to open a priviledged port' problem. But this one (for instance) is not convincing because it doesn't really say what I want: I want to restrict port 25 access to user mail and no other.
The `sockfs' solution is pretty much exactly what I need and seems to be simple enough: it generalizes the ad-hoc `(port > 1000 || uid == 0)' test.
You can indeed get the same kind of result in user-land by writing some kind of setuid port-allocator, but most such `solutions' require hacking the deamon's code.
So I re-ask the question: what was the incentive for not putting sockfs in the standard kernel ? Bad code ? Bloat ? Lack of usefulness ?
Stefan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |