linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] Devices accessibility control group itself

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: <20080306020241.GB5359@kroah.com>
Date:	Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:02:41 -0800
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ibm.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] Devices accessibility control group itself

On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 08:47:26PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> Finally, here's the control group, which makes full use of the
> interfaces, declared in the previous patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
> 
> ---
>  Documentation/controllers/devices.txt |   61 +++++++

The information here should be in Documentation/ABI/ right?

I still don't see how changing these permissions within the kernel is
going to affect anything outside of it, nor why you want to be tracking
this within the kernel itself.

What's wrong with just having different /dev trees for the different
containers?  That would not require any kernel changes, and you don't
have to write a tool to be sending these odd "mode settings" into the
kernel.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/