linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] 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: <200809230008.31025.agruen@suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:08:30 +0200
From:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	James Morris <jmorris@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morgan <morgan@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] file capabilities: add no_file_caps switch (v2)

On Monday, 22 September 2008 23:50:32 Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Andreas Gruenbacher (agruen@...e.de):
> > I agree. These other behaviorial changes should not depend on
> > CONFIG_SECURITY_FILE_CAPABILITIES; the old behavior should just be fixed
> > instead.
>
> That of course would be the point of the patch 3/3, which removes
> CONFIG_SECURITY_FILE_CAPABILITIES as a config option.  Should I
> do that

I think yes.

> when I redo the patch as per Stephen's suggestion to use filecaps=0/1?

This will require to adjust our installer, which uses no_file_caps already. I 
don't think that filecaps=0/1 is really necessary, but it I can life with 
either.

Thanks,
Andreas
--
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/