Re: [PATCH 00/12] One more attempt at useful kernel lockdown

Josh Boyer
2013-09-09T19:58:19Z

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 3:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I.e. capabilities ;)
>>
>> Circles. All I see here are circles.
>>
>> Having lived an entire release with a capabilities based mechanism for
>> this in Fedora, please no.
>>
>> And if you are talking about non-POSIX capabilities as you mentioned
>> earlier, that seems to be no different than having securelevel being a
>> bitmask of, well, levels. I don't have much opinion on securelevel
>> being a big hammer or a bitmask of finer grained things, but I do
>> think it's a more manageable way forward. Calling the implementation
>> "capabilities" seems to just be unnecessarily confusing.
>>
>
> This is the term "capability" in the general sense, not the POSIX
> implementation thereof.

See the whole last paragraph. Particularly the last sentence.

josh