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 just think that capabilities will ultimately be superseded by TE.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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans