netdev - setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C2F7A55.5090700@redfish-solutions.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 Jul 2010 11:58:45 -0600
From:	Philip Prindeville <philipp_subx@...fish-solutions.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability?

Does anyone else think that setsockopt(IP_TOS) should be a privileged 
operation, perhaps using CAP_NET_ADMIN, or maybe even adding separate 
granularity as CAP_NET_TOS?

-Philip

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html