Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] fork: Add the ability to create tasks with givenpids

[Pavel Emelyanov]

On 11/23/2011 08:24 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 04:20:44PM +0000, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> Would CAP_CHECKPOINT be a shame too?  
>>
>> I think CAP_CHECKPOINT (or something through some LSM) would be
>> definitely better.
>>
>>> I'm reluctant about priviledge
>>> through fd inheritance mostly because of its unusualness.  I don't
>>> think priv management is a good problem space for small creative
>>> solutions.  We're much better off with mundane mechanisms which people
>>> are already familiar with and is easy to account for.
>>
>> fd inheritance wouldn't work for gdb; a user spawned gdb
>> wouldn't inherit an open fd to kernel.ns_last_pid from anywhere.
> 
> I see.  So, let's do it for root for now and later add finer grained
> CAP as necessary/viable.  Pavel, what do you think?

OK, I'll send the respective patches soon.

> Thanks.
> 

--
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/