lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: capabilitiescompute_cred
    Stephen Smalley wrote:

    > On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 15:21, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
    >
    >>I agree in principle, but it would still be nice to have a simple way to
    >>have useful capabilities without setting up a MAC system. I don't see a
    >>capabilities fix adding any significant amount of code; it just takes
    >>some effort to get it right.
    >
    >
    > I'm not opposed to making the existing capability logic more useable; I
    > just think that capabilities will ultimately be superseded by TE.
    >
    >
    >>You can find my attempts to get it right in the
    >>linux-kernel archives, and I'll probably try to get something into 2.7
    >>when it forks. With or without MAC, having a functioning capability
    >>system wouldn't hurt security.
    >
    >
    > Does revising the capability logic need to wait on 2.7? Have you
    > changed the logic significantly since the last patch you posted to lkml?
    >

    I don't _think_ it's changed, but I'll double-check that in a few days
    (I'm out of town). I'll also rediff my patch. Should it be a config
    option?

    Anyway, I have no strong objection to seeing a change in 2.6 -- there's
    just some risk that it could break something that depends on the current
    (broken, undocumented) behavior.

    Andrew: would you be willing to put a capabilities fix into -mm?

    --Andy
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.028 / U:33.132 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site