From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Polyakov Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 01:29:56 +0000 Subject: Re: [Drbd-dev] [PATCH 2/2 v2] netlink: kill eff_cap from struct Message-Id: <20110304012956.GA13573@ioremap.net> List-Id: References: <4D6F6180.5030903@trash.net> <20110303173230.GP4988@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <20110303.105655.189705829.davem@davemloft.net> <20110303201522.GT4988@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <20110303223746.GI25069@barkeeper1-xen.linbit> In-Reply-To: <20110303223746.GI25069@barkeeper1-xen.linbit> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Chris Wright , David Miller , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com Hi. On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:37:46PM +0100, Lars Ellenberg (lars.ellenberg@linbit.com) wrote: > If so, then this change introduces the possibility for normal users to > send privileged commands to connector based subsystems, even if they > may not be able to bind() to suitable sockets to receive any replies. > > Am I missing something? Yup, connector is very async at that place, but I wonder why the hell I ever made that decision. I believe we can replace it with pure sync call of the registered connector callback, since netlink is synchronous and no one has any problem with it. -- Evgeniy Polyakov