[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8d1d47cf-3bf1-6c39-c02c-941515be1586@metux.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 20:37:33 +0200
From: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
jannh@...gle.com, dhowells@...hat.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, serge@...lyn.com, luto@...nel.org,
arnd@...db.de, ebiederm@...ssion.com, keescook@...omium.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
dancol@...gle.com
Subject: Re: RFC: on adding new CLONE_* flags [WAS Re: [PATCH 0/4] clone: add
CLONE_PIDFD]
On 15.04.19 21:59, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> Just spit-balling -- is no_new_privs not sufficient for this usecase?> Not granting privileges such as setuid during execve(2) is the main>
point of that flag.
Oh, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks.
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287
Powered by blists - more mailing lists