Messages in this thread | | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PAG support, try #2 | Date | 14 May 2003 12:28:45 -0700 |
| |
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0305140924040.3107-100000@home.transmeta.com> By author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > And "pag_t" needs to be bigger, at least 64 bits. That, together with the > "credential == 'list of PAG'" thing means that you can choose to do things > like: > > - high bits zero, low bits match the UID (ie all users automatically get > their own "private PAG", PAM just does the joining automatically) > > I personally _require_ this. End of discussion. Anything that doesn't > allow for user-friendly automatic PAG's is, in my not-so-humble > opinion, a total waste of time, and complete CRAP. > > Did I make my opinion clear enough? In other words, when I log in, I > want to automatically get certain credentials, and I consider the > log-in sequence to be sufficient security for those credentials. > > Anything that isn't designed for this is WRONG. > > - high bits "group pattern", low bits "GUID" - same thing as UID. Some > PAG's are automatically associated with the _group_ ID of the person. > When I log in, and I'm in the "engineering" group, I should > automatically get access to the "engineering PAG". > > - users can controlledly join other PAGs as they wish (ie if you want to > have credentials that are on top of the automatic user credentials, you > have to join them explicitly, which migth require a stronger password > or something) > > This allows for the "extra" credentials, and it also allows for users > joining each others PAG's at least temporarily. It also allows things > like extra groups outside of the traditional scope of groups (ie you > can set up ad-hoc groups by creating a new PAG, and letting others join > it). >
Sounds like what you really want is capabilities, and not in the setcap sense. I think this would be marvellous, myself, and I completely agree that we need it to be user friendly.
To some degree, groups are also capabilities, but there is too much rigamarole surrounding them. I also think evidence has shown that it's too hard to add or remove group ownership; you basically need the user to log out completely in order to add or drop the new ownerships.
-=hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |