[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ec0b1ef9-ae2f-d6c7-99b7-4699ced146e4@metux.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 10:51:49 +0200
From: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal
On 08.06.21 21:00, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> Eg I can do open() on a file and I get to keep that FD. I get to keep
> that FD even if someone later does chmod() on that file so I can't
> open it again.
>
> There are lots of examples where a one time access control check
> provides continuing access to a resource. I feel the ongoing proof is
> the rarity in Unix.. 'revoke' is an uncommon concept in Unix..
Yes, it's even possible that somebody w/ privileges opens an fd and
hands it over to somebody unprivileged (eg. via unix socket). This is
a very basic unix concept. If some (already opened) fd now suddenly
behaves differently based on the current caller, that would be a break
with traditional unix semantics.
--mtx
--
---
Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert
werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287
Powered by blists - more mailing lists