[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111024172842.GA13556@sergelap>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:28:42 -0500
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>
To: "Andrew G. Morgan" <morgan@...nel.org>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com, richard@....at,
mikevs@...all.net, segoon@...nwall.com, gregkh@...e.de,
eparis@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] user namespace: clamp down users of cap_raised
Quoting Andrew G. Morgan (morgan@...nel.org):
> Serge,
>
> It seems as if this whole thing is really idiomatic. How about?
>
> #define IN_ROOT_USER_NS_CAPABLE(cap) \
> ((current_user_ns() == &init_user_ns) && cap_raised(current_cap(), cap))
My objection to this was that it seems to encourage others to use it :) I'm
not sure we want that. Also, IN_ROOT_USER_NS seems more generally useful.
But if I'm the only one who feels this way I'll go ahead and do it...
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists