Re: implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch

[Andrew Morgan]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>> Does that explain it?
> 
> Yes, thanks, but then it still could come in handy to have fE be a full
> bitset, so the application gets some eff caps automatically, while
> others it has to manually set...

[We touched on this a number of emails back.]

If an application is capability aware, it can manipulate its own
capabilities and should have fE=0.

If an application is not capability aware, it needs to have *all* of its
capabilities enabled at exec() time. Otherwise, it won't work.

The only reason for having an fE bitmap is to allow a capability-aware
program (you really trust to do its privileged operations carefully) to
be lazy and get some of its capabilities raised for free. Perhaps you
can clarify why this is a desirable thing? :-)

Cheers

Andrew
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGg1LqQheEq9QabfIRAo3BAKCO8QrfcKBNqhfnn2BHp8O/qDkgXgCgleEl
xP7LZPU9Qn6AjqI3ZM3FZ+4=
=urmz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
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/