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 10:50:39 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: References: <20150223161625.GD25477@ubuntumail> <20150223164623.GB32181@mail.hallyn.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150223164623.GB32181@mail.hallyn.com> Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: Serge 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 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?