lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Subjectsockfs (was: setting access rights to priviledged ports)
Date
>>>>> "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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.066 / U:1.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site