linux-kernel - Re: security: introduce file caps

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: <20061124002144.18231ae9.chris@friedhoff.org>
Date:	Fri, 24 Nov 2006 00:21:44 +0100
From:	Chris Friedhoff <chris@...edhoff.org>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Chris Friedhoff <chris@...edhoff.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@...gai.gr.jp>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: security: introduce file caps

I can confirm this behavior, but only in the interaction of xinit and X.
ping and ntpdate behave with a patched kernel but
CONFIG_SECURITY_FS_CAPABILITIES=n like expected, even with empty or
wrong capabilities. Tested with 2.6.18.3 kernel

Chris



 On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:41:59 -0600
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com> wrote:

> Quoting Andrew Morton (akpm@...l.org):
> > On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 13:12:03 +0100
> > Chris Friedhoff <chris@...edhoff.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > xinit respects capabilities (at least i guess), so when the system has
> > > capability-support, the binary /usr/X11R6/bin/xinit neeeds the
> > > capability cap_kill even when no capability extended attribute exists
> > > for this binary.
> > >
> > > setfcaps cap_kill=ep /usr/X11R6/bin/xinit
> > >
> > > I documented this here:
> > > http://www.friedhoff.org/fscaps.html#Xorg,%20xinit,%20xfce,%20kde
> > >
> > > and for more:
> > > http://www.friedhoff.org/fscaps.html
> > >
> > 
> > Even when CONFIG_SECURITY_FS_CAPABILITIES=n?
> 
> No, the patch shouldn't change behavior when
> CONFIG_SECURITY_FS_CAPABILITIES=n, though of course I see why it did.  I
> will send a fixed patch tomorrow or this weekend.
> 
> sorry,
> -serge


--------------------
Chris Friedhoff
chris@...edhoff.org
-
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/