[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 16:55:18 +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>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
"jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] Add BSD-style securelevel support
On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 09:51 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 09/09/2013 09:44 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 09:42 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >
> >> Neither of this tend to be true long time... which leads one back to
> >> capabilities.
> >
> > We can't use capabilities. Doing so breaks existing userspace.
> >
>
> Capabilities don't have to mean "POSIX capabilities"... although the
> POSIX capability system in Linux really is a massive fail which it would
> be nice to find some kind of fix for.
Designing a worthwhile capabilities interface certainly seems like a
great thing for someone to spend a few years on, but I'm not going to be
happy if it's the only way to solve this problem.
--
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists