linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] file capabilities: turn on by default

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: <48D809A3.8040207@oracle.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:09:55 -0700
From:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
CC:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	James Morris <jmorris@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morgan <morgan@...nel.org>,
	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] file capabilities: turn on by default

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Randy Dunlap (randy.dunlap@...cle.com):
>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:49:01 -0500 Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>
>>> Now that file capabilities can be turned off at boot, go ahead
>>> and compile them into the kernel by default by making
>>> CONFIG_SECURITY_FILE_CAPABILITIES=y the default.
>> Hi,
>>
>> How much code does this add to everyone's kernel?
> 
> Here are the sizes I get with Linus' plain tree and patched
> with both of these patches:
> 
> master  with file capabilities: 6241626
> master  w/o  file capabilities: 6241595
> 
> patched with file capabilities: 6241782
> patched w/o  file capabilities: 6241595
> 
> So actually I don't like the added size.
> 
>>> Note that the boot flag no_file_caps must be specified to turn
>>> file capabilities off, as by default they are on.  So the
>>> default behavior is in fact changed.
>> If most people want this enable, using 'no_file_caps' makes
>> some sense.  OTOH, if most people don't want/use it, then
>> having a 'file_caps_on' option would make more sense.
>>
>> Do you have any (unbiased :) ideas about this?
> 
> I'll sit this one out I guess :)

BTW, I like Stephen's suggestion of using file_caps=0/1 instead
of no_file_caps.

-- 
~Randy
--
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/