linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: Implement SO

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

Date:	Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:05:15 -0700
From:	Tim Hockin <thockin@...gle.com>
To:	Simo Sorce <ssorce@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	jkaluza@...hat.com, lpoetter@...hat.com, kay@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: Implement SO_PEERCGROUP

I don't buy that it is not practical.  Not convenient, maybe.  Not
clean, sure.  But it is practical - it uses mechanisms that exist on
all kernels today.  That is a win, to me.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Simo Sorce <ssorce@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 10:55 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> So give each container its own unix socket.  Problem solved, no?
>
> Not really practical if you have hundreds of containers.
>
> Simo.
>
> --
> 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/
--
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/