Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 May 1999 13:57:53 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Capabilities done right... |
| |
Hi!
> > I'm not entirely convinced. The thing with ELF notes is that they only > > > work with ELF. That may sound obvious, and it is, but it makes me > wonder > > whether it's the right way at all. > > Thats what I've said all along. Not to mention that the > ELF header capabilities idea is probably insecure from the start. One > wouldn't place the permission bits inside the file, ehh? So why
If those permission bits only _lower_ your priviledge, it is completely ok to put permission bits into file.
> we place the capabilities, inside the file. For one thing, unless > you really do some weird (and IMHO kludge) stuff, anyone who has > the ability to modify the contents of the file also has the ability > to modify the capabilities. I don't think that the kernel can
Yes, and I do not care they can do it: they can lower their priviledges. They were free to do it anywy.
> They ALL provide filesystems that include the ability to store > privileges > (read capabilities).
I wonder what problems they have with tools like tar and nfs. Putting capabilities into namespace is REALLY BIG change. And I can't see it happening anytime soon.
Pavel -- The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+
- 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/
| |