Re: implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch

[James Morris]

On Sun, 24 Jun 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:

> > 2) Allocate capability bit-31 for CAP_SETFCAP, and use it to gate
> > whether the user can set this xattr on a file or not. CAP_SYS_ADMIN is
> > way too overloaded and this functionality is special.
> 
> The functionality is special, but someone with CAP_SYS_ADMIN can always
> unload the capability module and create the security.capability xattr
> using the dummy module.
> 
> If we do add this cap, do we want to make it apply to all security.*
> xattrs?

The underlying issue here is the notion of security mechanisms which are 
built as loadable modules.  It's not useful for any in-tree users, and 
introduces several unnecessary problems which then need to be addressed.

A better approach would be to make LSM a statically linked interface.

This would also allow us to unexport the LSM symbols and reduce the API 
abuse by third-party modules.


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>
-
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/