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  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:	Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:46:22 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <>
To:	Vivek Goyal <>
Cc:	Simo Sorce <>, Daniel J Walsh <>,
	David Miller <>, Tejun Heo <>,
	"" <>,,,,
	Network Development <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: Implement SO_PASSCGROUP to enable passing cgroup path

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Vivek Goyal <> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 03:10:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> [..]
>> At this point I think journald people need to give a little bit more
>> details on how they plan to use SO_PASSCGROUP.
>> For my use cases I care only about streams and SO_PEERCGROUP that does
>> not have any of the (perceived) issues of SO_PASSCGROUP.
> Ok, so we agree that SO_PEERCGROUP is not a problem. And it solves the
> problem for some of the use cases.
> And there is lot of contention on the SO_PASSCGROUP option.
> So how about taking one step at a time. Get SO_PEERCGROUP in first and
> then get into more details on how SO_PASSCGROUP will exactly be used and
> then decide what to do.

My only objection to SO_PEERCGROUP is that I don't believe that a
legitimate use case exists.  I think the feature itself is safe to

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists