linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] security: capabilities patch (version 0.4.4), part 3/4: introduce new capabilities

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]

Message-ID: <20060918115850.GA24548@clipper.ens.fr>
Date:	Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:58:50 +0200
From:	David Madore <david.madore@....fr>
To:	Joshua Brindle <method@...too.org>
Cc:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Linux Kernel mailing-list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LSM mailing-list <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] security: capabilities patch (version 0.4.4), part 3/4: introduce new capabilities

On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:46:06AM -0400, Joshua Brindle wrote:
> And that is just practical stuff, there are still problems with
> embedding policy into binaries all over the system in an entirely
> non-analyzable way, and this extends to all capabilities, not just the
> open() one.

Some people prefer the policy to be embedded into binaries all over
the system rather than centralized in one place.  I think it's just a
question of choice: if you don't like this way of doing things, you
don't have to use it, of course (my "cuppabilities" module would be
entirely optional).

Happy hacking,

-- 
     David A. Madore
    (david.madore@....fr,
     http://www.madore.org/~david/ )
-
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/