From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] capabilities: Ambient capabilities
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 14:25:46 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504241424330.11285@gentwo.org>
References: <CALCETrUGASa3Gp6cC1zdAahcS59DOdyLnTtgNX7t7FucMZLmoQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALQRfL6z2dEtPkWiuGydT0a+y4iWm2qw-cY0Rk9hA-K4gPw_qA@mail.gmail.com> <CALCETrWRHRVLotFs=Cpdr=7KjE7q52NdT62GxZg=xjv+LFZBqw@mail.gmail.com> <CALQRfL7AyadFcu9JqtC6FGnuuqY7zbnFAL81XnwBvn0o6c6UWQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1503300754070.5031@gentwo.org> <CALCETrW9ckw=7-1JSyFkenhFu2_1MvVqjA+inOmsuuWemGaU0w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504091024540.13650@gentwo.org> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504230900260.32203@gentwo.org> <20150424175348.GL16377@ubuntumail>
 <CALCETrW5_85mFFTkzCVNA5N1KQeNBrkw2d8FF3H3LYtmz6UAPw@mail.gmail.com> <20150424190935.GN16377@ubuntumail>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Return-path: <linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150424190935.GN16377@ubuntumail>
Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linuxfoundation.org>, "Andrew G. Morgan" <morgan@kernel.org>, Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>, Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>, linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>, Aaron Jones <aaronmdjones@gmail.com>, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Markku Savela <msa@moth.iki.fi>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 24 Apr 2015, Serge Hallyn wrote:

> > I object because CAP_SETPCAP is very powerful whereas
> > CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE, for example, isn't.  I'm fine with having a
> > switch to turn off ambient caps, but requiring the "on" state to give
>
> Would only really be needed for the initial 'enable ambient caps for this
> process tree', though.  Once that was set, add/remove'ing caps from the
> ambient set wouldn't need to be required.

Exactly. Its much simpler than alternate approaches. And its convoluted
enough.