Re: [RFC] capabilities: Ambient capabilities
From: Andy Lutomirski
Date: Fri Apr 24 2015 - 14:42:11 EST
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Quoting Christoph Lameter (cl@xxxxxxxxx):
>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2015, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> > > I'll submit a new version this week with the securebits. Sorry for the delay.
>> > Are we going to get a new version?
>> Replying to my own here. Cant we simply use the SETPCAP approach as per
>> the patch I posted?
> Andy had objections to that, but it seems ok to me.
I object because CAP_SETPCAP is very powerful whereas
CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE, for example, isn't. I'm fine with having a
switch to turn off ambient caps, but requiring the "on" state to give
processes superpowers seems unfortunate.
Sorry for the huge delay. I got caught up with travel and the merge
window. Here's a sneak peek:
I need to write the user code to go with it and test it a bit before
sending it out for real.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/