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

[Casey Schaufler]

On 2/3/2015 7:17 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> None of this could address the problem here, though: if I hold a
>> capability and I want to pass that capability to an exec'd helper, I
>> shouldn't need the fs's help to do this.
> Amen!
>
That's completely consistent with the notion that if a binary has no
file capabilities (as opposed to a set that contains no capabilities)
the process capabilities are unchanged by exec(). If the binary does
have capabilities, however, it must always apply them. That should be
obvious. In your case, the helper would have no file capabilities, and
hence get whatever the invoker has. A program that should never run with
capabilities should have a file attribute stating such. Where it gets
sticky is the case where you want inheritance when invoked by one service
and no capabilities when invoked from another. If we live with the notion
that you have to choose this is easy enough to solve.


--
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/