From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Serge Hallyn Subject: Re: [PATCH] capabilities: Ambient capability set V1 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 18:15:53 +0000 Message-ID: <20150223181553.GE25477@ubuntumail> References: <20150223161625.GD25477@ubuntumail> <20150223164623.GB32181@mail.hallyn.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Lameter Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , Serge Hallyn , Andy Lutomirski , Aaron Jones , Ted Ts'o , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linuxfoundation.org, "Andrew G. Morgan" , Mimi Zohar , Austin S Hemmelgarn , Markku Savela , Jarkko Sakkinen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Michael Kerrisk , Jonathan Corbet List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Quoting Christoph Lameter (cl@linux.com): > On Mon, 23 Feb 2015, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > I do not see a problem with dropping privilege since the ambient set > > > is supposed to be preserved across a drop of priviledge. > > > > Because you're tricking the program into thinking it has dropped > > the privilege, when in fact it has not. > > So the cap was dropped from the cap perm set but it is still active > in the ambient set? Right, and the legacy program doesn't know to check the new set.