From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH] capabilities: Ambient capability set V1 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:41:51 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: References: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Serge Hallyn , Aaron Jones , Ted Ts'o , LSM List , Andrew Morton , "Andrew G. Morgan" , Mimi Zohar , Austin S Hemmelgarn , Markku Savela , Jarkko Sakkinen , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux API , Michael Kerrisk , Jonathan Corbet List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 23 Feb 2015, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > If you set ambient caps and then run a setuid program (without > no_new_privs), then the ambient set *must* be cleared by the kernel > because that's what the setuid program expects. Yes, the whole Why would a setuid program expect that? I'd say we expect the ambient set to remain in effect. What would break if the ambient set would stay active?