| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20060907001151.48122.qmail@web36607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 17:11:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> To: Linux Kernel mailing-list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: patch to make Linux capabilities into something useful (v 0.3.1) --- David Madore <david.madore@....fr> wrote: > ... (one merely needs to do > something about > the new bunch of capabilities I've introduced, but > it should be easy > to hack something which makes sure no programs are > surprised or > broken). You have not introduced new capabilities so much as you've introduced a new layer of policy, that being things that unprivileged processes can do but that "underprivileged" processes cannot. I personally think that this would make a spiffy LSM, but I don't buy it as an extension of the POSIX (draft) capability mechanism. Why? Because the capability mechanism deals with providing controls over the abilty to violate the traditional Unix security policy, as implemented in Linux. Adding "negative" privilege might not be a bad idea, but it is outside the scope of capabilities AND there is a mechanism (LSM) explicity in place for adding such restrictions. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists