[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <94lcejawn6db48uv4ou0vly2.1363741770288@email.android.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 01:09:35 +0000
From: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
"kexec@...ts.infradead.org" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL
The cases I'd looked at seemed to mostly involve obsolete hardware or only allow command submission to SCSI targets, so I wasn't too worried about them - but, like I said, I've no inherent objection to using CAP_SYS_RAWIO as long as we modify any cases where userspace really does need that access.
--
Matthew Garrett | matthew.garrett@...ula.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists