Re: Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1]

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
17 May 1999 21:45:50 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: [VFS] move active filesystem"
Previous message: Pavel Machek: "Re: Memcopy by 8?"
Maybe in reply to: Pavel Machek: "Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1]"
Next in thread: Horst von Brand: "Re: Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1]"

In article <linux.kernel.19990516202347.A290@bug.ucw.cz>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@bug.ucw.cz> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>> > Next try with capabilities, this time against 2.3.1. Patch is completely
>> > safe and should significantly enhance system security. It is completely
>> > backward compatible: ie. no semantics change. Capabilities are
>> > implemented using elf notes (and this version parses notes correctly).
>> > Software exists for adding capabilities at runtime, so you don't even
>> > require a recompile.
>>
>> I'm not entirely convinced. The thing with ELF notes is that they only
>> work with ELF. That may sound obvious, and it is, but it makes me wonder
>> whether it's the right way at all.
>
>Only other executables are a.out (nobody uses them these days)

Nonsense.

____
david parsons \bi/ Mastodon Linux: all a.out, all the time.
\/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Chris Wedgwood: "Re: [VFS] move active filesystem"
Previous message: Pavel Machek: "Re: Memcopy by 8?"
Maybe in reply to: Pavel Machek: "Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1]"
Next in thread: Horst von Brand: "Re: Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1]"