Re: [RFC] capabilities: Ambient capabilities
From: Serge Hallyn
Date: Fri Apr 24 2015 - 22:45:53 EST
Quoting Andy Lutomirski (luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx):
> On Apr 24, 2015 2:15 PM, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 01:18:44PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 24 Apr 2015, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> That's sort of what my patch does -- you need CAP_SETPCAP to switch
> > > >> the securebit.
> > > >>
> > > >> But Christoph's patch required it to add caps to the ambient set, right?
> > > >
> > > > Yes but you seem to be just adding one additional step without too much of
> > > > a benefit because you still need CAP_SETPCAP.
> > > >
> > >
> > > No, because I set the default to on :)
> > Right - I definately prefer
> > . default off
> > . CAP_SETPCAP required to turn it on (for self and children)
> > . once on, anyone can copy bits from (whatever we decided) to pA.
> Why default off? If there's some weird reason that switching it on
> could cause a security problem, then I'd agree, but I haven't spotted
> a reason yet.
Cause it's less scary?
I'll just wait for the new patchset :)
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/