[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87h8yf7szd.fsf@xmission.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 19:38:30 -0500
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, lkp@...org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
tycho@...ker.com, James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
vgoyal@...hat.com, christian.brauner@...lbox.org,
amir73il@...il.com, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
casey@...aufler-ca.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xattr: Enable security.capability in user namespaces
Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> On 07/13/2017 01:49 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> > My big question right now is can you implement Ted's suggested
> > restriction. Only one security.foo or secuirty.foo@... attribute ?
> We need to raw-list the xattrs and do the check before writing them. I am fairly sure this can be done.
>
> So now you want to allow security.foo and one security.foo@...=<> or just a single one security.foo(@[[:print:]]*)?
>
The latter.
Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists