netdev - Re: 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 3 Jul 2010 19:55:30 +0100
From:	Alexander Clouter <alex@...riz.org.uk>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: setsockopt(IP_TOS) being privileged or distinct capability?

Philip Prindeville <philipp_subx@...fish-solutions.com> wrote:
>
> 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?
> 
I really would prefer not having to run telnet and ssh *clients* as 
root. :)

Cheers

-- 
Alexander Clouter
.sigmonster says: Someday your prints will come.
                  		-- Kodak

--
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