netdev - Re: Fwd: [PATCH] [-mm] ACPI: export ACPI events via netlink

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]

Message-Id: <1183122920.4089.63.camel@johannes.berg>
Date:	Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:15:20 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc:	hadi@...erus.ca, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-acpi@...r" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, lenb@...nel.org,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH] [-mm] ACPI: export ACPI events via netlink

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 15:11 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:

> > Hm. I'm starting to dislike the dynamic registration the more I think
> > about it. Now when a group is unregistered I'd have to unbind everybody
> > who's currently using it... At least when I want to enforce
> > root/non-root binds which is a further goal.
> 
> 
> How about using module references to prevent unloading while sockets
> are bound? We already do the same thing for netlink families.

Ah, no, you're both thinking something different. I'm thinking if we
allow dynamic registration the only sensible thing is to have dynamic
unregistration as well, and then we can have this sequence

 (1) register group X with non-root
 (2) non-root app A binds group X
 (3) kernel unregisters group X
 (4) something else in kernel reregisters group ID X but root-only
-> non-root app A is bound to root-only group X

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (191 bytes)