[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] capabilities not inherited

    On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Alexander Nyberg wrote:
    > btw since the last discussion was about not changing the existing
    > interface and thus exposing security flaws, what about introducing
    > another prctrl that says maybe PRCTRL_ACROSS_EXECVE?

    Wasn't the original inherited set supposed take care of that?

    > Any new user-space applications must understand the implications of
    > using it so it's safe in that aspect. Yes?

    As far as I can tell, applying the patch from the earlier discussion
    and setting the inherited set has the same, "I really meant to do this"
    effect as what you propose.

    > (yeah it's rather silly since there already is an unused
    > keep_capabilities flag but that would change old interfaces so ok)

    Isn't the keep_capabilities flag related to setuid() ? or did I miss

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

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-06-08 23:37    [W:0.023 / U:8.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site