[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230403134722.4860160c@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2023 13:47:22 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Anjali Kulkarni <anjali.k.kulkarni@...cle.com>
Cc: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"zbr@...emap.net" <zbr@...emap.net>,
"brauner@...nel.org" <brauner@...nel.org>,
"johannes@...solutions.net" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
"ecree.xilinx@...il.com" <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>,
"leon@...nel.org" <leon@...nel.org>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"socketcan@...tkopp.net" <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
"petrm@...dia.com" <petrm@...dia.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] netlink: Reverse the patch which removed
filtering
On Sat, 1 Apr 2023 19:58:31 +0000 Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
> > patch 5 looks a bit connector specific, no idea :S
> > patch 6 does seem to lift the NET_ADMIN for group 0
> > and from &init_user_ns, CAP_NET_ADMIN to net->user_ns, CAP_NET_ADMIN
> > whether that's right or not I have no idea :(
> I can move this back to &init_user_ns, and will look at group 0 too.
Just to be clear - I wasn't saying that it's incorrect, I simply don't
know :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists