netdev - Re: RFC: disablenetwork facility. (v4)

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, 29 Dec 2009 16:46:22 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Michael Stone <michael@...top.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, David Lang <david@...g.hm>,
	Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>,
	"C. Scott Ananian" <cscott@...ott.net>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Bernie Innocenti <bernie@...ewiz.org>,
	Mark Seaborn <mrs@...hic-beasts.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Samir Bellabes <sam@...ack.fr>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: RFC: disablenetwork facility. (v4)

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:27:22 CST, "Serge E. Hallyn" said:
> I think i disagree.  A uid is just a uid (or should be).  One day we may
> have a way for a factotum-style daemon to grant the ability to an unpriv
> task to setuid without CAP_SETUID.  I think slingling uids and gids
> around that you already have access to should be fine.

Yes, but not doing the clear and obvious simple thing now for a "one day
we may have" consideration seems a poor engineering tradeoff.

Yes, slinging uids and gids around *would* be nice.  But first we need a clear
plan for making /usr/bin/newgrp a shell builtin - once that happens, *then*
we can re-address this code. ;)

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped