From: Andrew Morgan <morgan@kernel.org>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
Andrew Morgan <agm@google.com>,
casey@schaufler-ca.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@google.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:29:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <468C1157.70905@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070702143816.GA17723@vino.hallyn.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> 1. Exactly Andrew describes. Once userspace switches to a new cap
> format, an older kernel simply won't support them
Mmm. Let me see. I think I prefer this one! :-)
> 2. As Andrew describes, but also encode the version number into the
> capability name, i.e. security.capability.v3. Now userspace can
> optionally tack on more than one capability version to be backward
> compatible.
If you have a significant legacy of use of earlier versions, I guess
this makes sense. However, given the experimental nature of this support
(it will be a while before the user space support for this is
secure/robust), I'm not all that concerned about legacy support.
> 3. Somewhat different than Andrew describes. We mandate that any
> capability version N+1 consist of
>
> struct vfs_cap_data {
> __u32 magic;
> capability_version_1;
> capability_version_2;
> ...
> capability_version_N;
> capability_version_N+1;
> };
Ugh. I don't like this. It presumes that the kernel will get more and
more complicated over time. Please don't do this one.
> Or, for brevity,
>
> struct vfs_cap_data {
> __u32 first_magic;
> __u32 last_magic;
> capability_version_first;
> ...
> capability_version_last;
> };
>
> 4. Stick to the current plan, where switching to 64-bit caps will be
> done as
>
> struct vfs_cap_data_disk {
> __le32 version;
> __le32 data[]; /* eff[0], perm[0], inh[0], eff[1], ... */
> };
While asserting that it is more flexible etc., no one has yet actually
given an example of where fE being richer than a simple binary helps
anything. Until I see an example, I'm going to hold the position that
this is needless "complexity".
Cheers
Andrew
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGjBFXmwytjiwfWMwRAofJAKCXX2GkN39o45fCQmxpNpZIEVH8EgCeLaDy
AoWZNj/1MqT7oayabxUhIn8=
=OSBu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-04 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20070611123714.GA2063@sergelap.austin.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <878322.98602.qm@web36606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
[not found] ` <afff21250706110926l244ddc28i44289cb08a6721e2@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20070617135239.GA17689@sergelap>
[not found] ` <4676007F.7060503@kernel.org>
[not found] ` <20070618044017.GW3723@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
[not found] ` <20070620171037.GA28670@sergelap.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <20070620174613.GF3723@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
2007-06-21 16:00 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-23 8:13 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Andrew Morgan
2007-06-24 15:51 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-24 16:18 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch James Morris
2007-06-24 20:58 ` [PATCH][RFC] security: Convert LSM into a static interface James Morris
2007-06-24 22:09 ` Chris Wright
2007-06-24 22:37 ` James Morris
2007-06-25 1:38 ` Chris Wright
2007-06-24 23:40 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-06-25 1:39 ` Chris Wright
2007-06-25 3:37 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-06-25 3:57 ` Chris Wright
2007-06-25 13:02 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-06-25 14:24 ` Roberto De Ioris
2007-06-25 4:33 ` [PATCH try #2] " James Morris
2007-06-25 4:48 ` Petr Vandrovec
2007-06-25 4:58 ` James Morris
2007-06-25 16:59 ` Stephen Smalley
2007-06-25 23:56 ` [PATCH try #3] " James Morris
2007-06-25 20:37 ` [PATCH try #2] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2007-06-25 21:14 ` James Morris
2007-06-26 3:57 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-26 13:15 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-06-26 14:06 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-26 14:59 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-06-26 15:53 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-26 18:52 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-06-26 18:18 ` Greg KH
2007-06-26 18:40 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-26 4:09 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-06-26 4:25 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-06-26 13:47 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-27 0:07 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-06-27 0:57 ` Crispin Cowan
2007-06-27 1:22 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-06-27 4:24 ` Chris Wright
2007-06-27 13:41 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-27 14:36 ` James Morris
2007-06-27 17:21 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-27 18:51 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-27 19:28 ` James Morris
2007-06-28 2:48 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-25 3:57 ` [PATCH][RFC] " Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-25 4:10 ` Chris Wright
2007-06-25 4:54 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-25 13:50 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-06-25 13:54 ` James Morris
2007-06-25 14:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-25 15:08 ` Casey Schaufler
2007-06-27 5:00 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Andrew Morgan
2007-06-27 13:16 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-28 6:19 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Andrew Morgan
2007-06-28 13:36 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-28 15:14 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Casey Schaufler
2007-06-28 15:38 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-28 15:56 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Casey Schaufler
2007-06-29 5:30 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Andrew Morgan
2007-06-29 13:24 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-06-29 14:46 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Casey Schaufler
2007-06-28 15:50 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Andrew Morgan
2007-07-02 14:38 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Serge E. Hallyn
2007-07-04 21:29 ` Andrew Morgan [this message]
2007-07-04 23:00 ` implement-file-posix-capabilities.patch Casey Schaufler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=468C1157.70905@kernel.org \
--to=morgan@kernel.org \
--cc=agm@google.com \
--cc=akpm@google.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.