Re: viewprinting: what format should views be stored in?

[George Beshers <gbeshers@comcast.net>]

Hans Reiser wrote:

> George Beshers wrote:
>
>> We can't avoid it at some level without re-writing Linux security.  
>> Take a moment to consider
>> the set-UID bit on a file which is an executable and I think you will 
>> see what I am driving at.
>
>
> I don't see what you are saying.  Our mask does process oriented 
> security.  The underlying security remains a user/object/permission 
> mapping.
>
The issue is how the mask might change the semantics of sys_execve().  I 
have spent some time
starting to trace code around, but more work is required.

For the moment I think we are safe if the setuid and setgroup can not be 
altered by the mask.

We only change the semantics if the real/effective uid or gid is 
different at some point in the
processes execution because of the mask---begging situations where a 
call to setuid happens
only if a certain file is not available.

I want to get back to understanding your second proposed strategy.


>