Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM

Andreas Steinmetz
2005-01-07T22:47:56Z

Andrew Morton wrote:
> Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
>
>>Really, I think Linux has owned the server space for so long that some
>>folks on this list are getting hubristic. Just because you have the
>>best server OS does not mean it's the best at everything.
>
>
> nah, the requirement is clearly valid, and longstanding. We need to
> satisfy it. It's just a matter of working out the best way.
>
> Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org> wrote:
>
>>...
>>Last I checked they could be controlled separately in that module. It
>>has been suggested (by me and others) that one possible solution would
>>be to expand it to be generic for all caps.
>
>
> Maybe this is the way?

This could give an advantage for e.g. networked daemons, too. No more
root privilege necessary for applications just to bind to a privileged
port which does make life easier (CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE). Other ideas for
e.g. CAP_NET_RAW or CAP_SYS_RAWIO come to mind. Using the current
capabilties in this design as all incuding supersets that can be defined
more fine grained in a later step I guess should suit others, too. The
remaining problem would then be the design of an extensible interface
that is backwards compatible.

--
Andreas Steinmetz SPAMmers use robotrap@domdv.de