Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 20 May 1999 12:43:50 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1] |
| |
Hi!
> > 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. > > We also might do it in the dynamic linker, which is `the very first > constructor'.
Unfortunately:
* there are static executables out there.
* I'm afraid that people around dynamic linker would simply tell me to put it into kernel
* there are 2 different dynamic linkers (libc5 a glibc), but there's only one kernel.
I think that it is better to put into kernel than to put into dynamic loader; which is in turn better than having it nowhere at all.
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/
| |