lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] capabilites, take 2
From
Date
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu writes:

> On Thu, 13 May 2004 18:20:10 PDT, Chris Wright said:
>
>> I think it still needs more work. Default behavoiur is changed, like
>> Inheritble is full rather than clear, setpcap is enabled, etc. Also,
>> why do you change from Posix the way exec() updates capabilities? Sure,
>> there is no filesystem bits present, so this changes the calculation,
>> but I'm not convinced it's as secure this way. At least with newcaps=0.
>
> The last time the "capabilities" thread reared its head a while ago, Andy made
> a posting that pretty conclusively showed that the Posix way was totally b0rken
> if you ever intended to support filesystem bits. So if you wanted to ever have
> a snowball's chance of supporting something like:
>
> chcap cap_net_raw+ep /bin/ping

Seems like you're not aware of:
<http://www.olafdietsche.de/linux/capability/>

This supports filesystem capabilities with the current (POSIX?)
implementation. So, whatever Andy has shown, it has at least one
counter evidence q.e.d.

> 2) Toss all the filesystems capabilities support out the window.

I agree to disagree ;-)

Regards, Olaf.
-
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 14:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans