linux-kernel - Re: [capabilities] Allow normal inheritance for a configurable set of capabilities

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]

Date:	Tue, 3 Feb 2015 11:19:59 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Aaron Jones <aaronmdjones@...il.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [capabilities] Allow normal inheritance for a configurable set
 of capabilities

On Tue, 3 Feb 2015, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:

> So again I think the pA seems like an elegant way to work around this.
> I'm interested in other ideas, but I worry about the proc solution Christoph
> proposed because it would be system- or namespace-wide, rather than
> per-process.

Ok can we have a patch that realizes this? Maybe only a rough one?

--
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/