linux-kernel - Re: implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 4 Jul 2007 16:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:	Andrew Morgan <morgan@...nel.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Andrew Morgan <agm@...gle.com>, casey@...aufler-ca.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...gle.com>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch


--- Andrew Morgan <morgan@...nel.org> wrote:

> no one has yet actually
> given an example of where fE being richer than a simple binary helps
> anything. Until I see an example, I'm going to hold the position that
> this is needless "complexity".

The only counter to this argument is that you now have a different
structure on files than on processes. Not a major issue, but one 
structure to describe capability sets is less complex than two.
That way you can have one function to print a capset, regardless
of its coming off a file or a process.

Just a thought.


Casey Schaufler
casey@...aufler-ca.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/