netdev - Re: setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability?

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:	Sat, 03 Jul 2010 17:07:52 -0600
From:	Philip Prindeville <philipp_subx@...fish-solutions.com>
To:	Alexander Clouter <alex@...riz.org.uk>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability?

On 7/3/10 12:55 PM, Alexander Clouter wrote:
> Philip Prindeville<philipp_subx@...fish-solutions.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Does anyone else think that setsockopt(IP_TOS) should be a privileged
>> operation, perhaps using CAP_NET_ADMIN, or maybe even adding separate
>> granularity as CAP_NET_TOS?
>>
>>      
> I really would prefer not having to run telnet and ssh *clients* as
> root. :)
>
> Cheers
>
>    

Don't ping and traceroute -I currently run as root?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html