[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Filesystem Capabilities in 2.6?

    On Sat, 2 Nov 2002, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
    > Yes, but this has annoying side effects like booting single-user and
    > discovering things like /sbin/ping doesn't exist because mount -a
    > didn't run yet.

    No, /sbin/ping _would_ exist, it just wouldn't have gotten the elevated
    capabilities yet.

    But that shouldn't matter in single-user mode, since it doesn't _need_ any
    elevated capabilities (unless you've somehow made your single-user mode
    run as a normal user - that's really secure, but you can't do anything
    with it ;)

    [ In general the schenario you bring up is actually a good thing: a
    failure mode would fail with _less_ provileges rather than more. Which
    on the whole is exactly what you want - failure to initialize something
    should not leave nasty security holes around. ]

    On the other hand, I have this suspicion that the most secure setup is one
    that the sysadmin is _used_ to, and knows all the pitfalls of. Which
    obviously is a big argument for just maintaining the status quo with suid

    We have decades of knowledge on how to minimize the negative impact of
    suid (I've used sendmail as an example of a suid program, and yet last I
    looked sendmail was actually pretty careful about dropping all unnecessary
    privileges very early on).

    And as Al points out, new security features don't mean that you can just
    stop being careful.


    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: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.019 / U:1.044 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site