[lkml]   [1999]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1]
    In article <>,
    Albert D. Cahalan <> wrote:
    >Linus Torvalds writes:
    >> On Fri, 14 May 1999, Pavel Machek wrote:
    >> I suspect that it would be cleaner to have capabilities be a name-space
    >> issue rather than an inode issue. For example, the one thing I've always
    >> wanted to do with symlinks is to have symlinks that can change the
    >> privileges of the lookup - it's complex and maybe not a good idea, but
    >> it's a more intriguing concept and works with shellscripts and other
    >> systems where you can't add ELF notes..
    >You want to allow shellscripts with special powers?!?!?

    No, we (or at least I) might want to allow filenames with special powers.
    For example:

    mkdir -p /var/lib/private
    chmod 700 /var/lib/private
    mkdir -p /var/lib/public
    chmod 755 /var/lib/public
    make_some_data > /var/lib/private/file
    chmod 600 /var/lib/private/file
    ln -s /var/lib/private/file /var/lib/public/file

    # Everything up to now is standard stuff.
    # Here's the new stuff:

    chmod a+s (insert magic here) /var/lib/public/file

    From here on, anyone can access '/var/lib/private/file' if (and only if)
    they follow the symlink '/var/lib/public/file'.
    Zygo Blaxell, Linux Engineer, Corel Corporation. (work) or (play). Opinions above are my own, not Corel's.
    Linux ryo-ohki 2.2.1 #3 SMP Jan 31 23:45 EST 1999 i586 up 5 days, 20:37

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.019 / U:20.784 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site