Re: [capabilities] Allow normal inheritance for a configurable set of capabilities

[Mimi Zohar]

On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 18:08 +0000, Serge Hallyn wrote: 
> Quoting Casey Schaufler (casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx):
> > I'm game to participate in such an effort. The POSIX scheme
> > is workable, but given that it's 20 years old and hasn't
> > developed real traction it's hard to call it successful.
> 
> Over the years we've several times discussed possible reasons for this
> and how to help.  I personally think it's two things:  1. lack of
> toolchain and fs support.  The fact that we cannot to this day enable
> ping using capabilities by default because of cpio, tar and non-xattr
> filesystems is disheartening. 

We're working on resolving the CPIO issue.  tar currently supports
xattrs.  At this point, how many non-xattr filesystems are there really?

Mimi

>  2. It's hard for users and applications
> to know what caps they need.  yes the API is a bear to use, but we can
> hide that behind fancier libraries.  But using capabilities requires too
> much in-depth knowledge of precisely what caps you might need for
> whatever operations library may now do when you asked for something. 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 


--
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/