linux-kernel - Re: [patch] file capabilities: Add no_file

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: <20080828004807.GC16607@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:48:08 -0500
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>,
	"Andrew G. Morgan" <morgan@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] file capabilities: Add no_file_caps switch

Quoting James Morris (jmorris@...ei.org):
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, David Howells wrote:
> 
> >  (2) Neuter sys_capset().  I've been holding this off for the next merge
> >      window as it isn't a bugfix, unlike (1).  Perhaps I should ask James to
> >      push it to Linus.  James?
> 
> Linus only pulled the PF_SUPERPRIV fix once the sys_capset change was 
> removed from the patch.  It really does need to be a bugfix at this stage.

Ok, sorry, of course that makes sense.  I was just confused about where
the patch was originally heading.

Would it be appropriate to put the capset neutering patch in your
security-testing tree, James, or does that feed straight into
linux-next?

thanks,
-serge
--
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/