lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [May]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1]
Theodore Y. Ts'o writes:
> Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:04:55 +0200
> From: Pavel Machek <pavel@bug.ucw.cz>
>
> That's hard part, because this way dynamic linker + anything run
> before main() runs with elevated priviledges. That's problem, at least
> for me.
>
> I just came up with a random thought ---- and I'd need to do more
> investigating about the ELF format to make sure this is actually doable,
> but I believe we can control the order in which constructurs get run,
> yes?
>
> So why not simply put the code which drops the privileges in a
> constructor which is engineered to be run first? If the way that
> constructor is setup uses a stylized code can be easily found by a
> setcap or checkcap program (i.e., give the constructor a standard name,
> and store the capability restriction in a standard variable referenced
> by the constructor), then you can get the ability to query/set the
> capabilities, but it's done in such a way which doesn't require any
> special kernel hacks to enable the feature.
>
> This is actually a really cool thing, since it means that people could
> start using it with the current stable kernel, without needing any
> kernel patches or needing to wait for Linux 2.4 to ship.

Yes, that has its attractions. A couple of months ago I suggested
doing it in the dynamic linker for dynamically linked binaries and in
an ELF code section for statically linked binaries.

Regards,

Richard....
-
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 13:51    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site